Cargando…

Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study

OBJECTIVES/AIMS: This study was designed to determine the endodontic working length (WL) of root canals using digital extraoral periapical radiography (EOPAR) technique and comparing its accuracy with the standard digital intraoral periapical radiography (IOPAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sridhara, Arvind, Konde, Sapna, Noojadi, Sunil Raj, Kumar, Narayan Chandra, Belludi, Ashwitha C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7450189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32904081
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1751
_version_ 1783574764986564608
author Sridhara, Arvind
Konde, Sapna
Noojadi, Sunil Raj
Kumar, Narayan Chandra
Belludi, Ashwitha C
author_facet Sridhara, Arvind
Konde, Sapna
Noojadi, Sunil Raj
Kumar, Narayan Chandra
Belludi, Ashwitha C
author_sort Sridhara, Arvind
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES/AIMS: This study was designed to determine the endodontic working length (WL) of root canals using digital extraoral periapical radiography (EOPAR) technique and comparing its accuracy with the standard digital intraoral periapical radiography (IOPAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single-rooted mandibular first premolars indicated for orthodontic extraction were radiographed preoperatively to ensure closed apices. After gaining endodontic access, WL was determined by IOPAR using paralleling technique, followed by EOPAR, by placing a cone at +35° from the contralateral side. Accessed tooth was then extracted to obtain the actual root canal length and was compared with the radiographic lengths. Data were subjected to statistical analysis using paired t test. RESULTS: The actual length and the extraoral radiographic length showed no statistical significant difference (p = 0.326). The difference between the mean WL obtained by IOPA and EOPA was also not statistically significant (p = 0.096). The accuracy of IOPA technique was 97.87 ± 0.91% and that of EOPA technique was 94.65 ± 2.57%. CONCLUSION: The EOPA technique with an angulation of +35° can be used as an alternative to IOPA for mandibular premolars in apprehensive children, dental phobic patients with low pain threshold, neurological difficulties, and exaggerated gag reflex. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Sridhara A, Konde S, Noojadi SR, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(3):211–216.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7450189
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74501892020-09-04 Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study Sridhara, Arvind Konde, Sapna Noojadi, Sunil Raj Kumar, Narayan Chandra Belludi, Ashwitha C Int J Clin Pediatr Dent Original Article OBJECTIVES/AIMS: This study was designed to determine the endodontic working length (WL) of root canals using digital extraoral periapical radiography (EOPAR) technique and comparing its accuracy with the standard digital intraoral periapical radiography (IOPAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty single-rooted mandibular first premolars indicated for orthodontic extraction were radiographed preoperatively to ensure closed apices. After gaining endodontic access, WL was determined by IOPAR using paralleling technique, followed by EOPAR, by placing a cone at +35° from the contralateral side. Accessed tooth was then extracted to obtain the actual root canal length and was compared with the radiographic lengths. Data were subjected to statistical analysis using paired t test. RESULTS: The actual length and the extraoral radiographic length showed no statistical significant difference (p = 0.326). The difference between the mean WL obtained by IOPA and EOPA was also not statistically significant (p = 0.096). The accuracy of IOPA technique was 97.87 ± 0.91% and that of EOPA technique was 94.65 ± 2.57%. CONCLUSION: The EOPA technique with an angulation of +35° can be used as an alternative to IOPA for mandibular premolars in apprehensive children, dental phobic patients with low pain threshold, neurological difficulties, and exaggerated gag reflex. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Sridhara A, Konde S, Noojadi SR, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(3):211–216. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7450189/ /pubmed/32904081 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1751 Text en Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. © The Author(s). 2020 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Article
Sridhara, Arvind
Konde, Sapna
Noojadi, Sunil Raj
Kumar, Narayan Chandra
Belludi, Ashwitha C
Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title_full Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title_fullStr Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title_short Comparative Evaluation of Intraoral and Extraoral Periapical Radiographic Techniques in Determination of Working Length: An In Vivo Study
title_sort comparative evaluation of intraoral and extraoral periapical radiographic techniques in determination of working length: an in vivo study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7450189/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32904081
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1751
work_keys_str_mv AT sridharaarvind comparativeevaluationofintraoralandextraoralperiapicalradiographictechniquesindeterminationofworkinglengthaninvivostudy
AT kondesapna comparativeevaluationofintraoralandextraoralperiapicalradiographictechniquesindeterminationofworkinglengthaninvivostudy
AT noojadisunilraj comparativeevaluationofintraoralandextraoralperiapicalradiographictechniquesindeterminationofworkinglengthaninvivostudy
AT kumarnarayanchandra comparativeevaluationofintraoralandextraoralperiapicalradiographictechniquesindeterminationofworkinglengthaninvivostudy
AT belludiashwithac comparativeevaluationofintraoralandextraoralperiapicalradiographictechniquesindeterminationofworkinglengthaninvivostudy