Journal of Korean Dental Science

Korean Academy of Dental Science (대한치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluating Accuracy according to the Evaluator and Equipment Using Electronic Apex Locators

  • Yu, Beom-Young (Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Son, Keunbada (Department of Dental Science, Graduate School, Kyungpook National University) ;
  • Lee, Kyu-Bok (Advanced Dental Device Development Institute (A3DI), Kyungpook National University)
  • Received : 2020.10.27
  • Accepted : 2020.12.01
  • Published : 2020.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Using two types of electronic apex locators, this study aimed to investigate the differences in accuracy according to the evaluator and equipment. Materials and Methods: Artificial teeth of the lower first premolars and two mandibular acrylic models (A and B) were used in this study. In the artificial teeth, the pulp chamber was opened and the access cavity was prepared. Using calibrated digital Vernier calipers, the distance from the top of the cavity and the root apex was measured to assess the actual distance between two artificial teeth. The evaluation was conducted by 20 dentists, and each evaluator repeated measurements for each electronic apex locator five times. The difference between the actual distance from the top of the cavity to the root apex and the distance measured using electronic measuring equipment was compared. For statistical analysis, the Friedman test the Mann-Whitney U-test were conducted and the differences between groups were analyzed (α=0.05). Result: As for the accuracy of measurement according to the two types of electronic apex locators, the value of the measurement error was 0.4753 mm in Dentaport ZX and 0.3321 mm in E-Cube Plus. Moreover, electronic apex locators Dentaport ZX and E-Cube Plus showed statistically significant differences (P<0.05). As for the difference in the accuracy of the two types of electronic apex locators according to the evaluator, the resulting values differed depending on the evaluator and showed a statistically significant difference (P<0.001). Conclusion: Electronic apex locator E-Cube Plus showed higher accuracy than did Dentaport ZX. Nevertheless, both types of electronic apex locators showed 100% accuracy in finding the region within root apex ±0.5 mm zone. Furthermore, according to the evaluator, the two electronic apex locators showed different resulting values.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Technology Innovation Program (or Industrial Strategic Technology Development Program (10077743, The development of the handpiece design for the air turbine and root canal treatment) funded By the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE, Korea); and Industrial Strategic Technology Development Program (10062635, New hybrid milling machine with a resolution of less than 10 ㎛ development, using open CAD/CAM S/W integrated platforms for one-day prosthetic treatment of 3D smart medical care system) funded By the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE, Korea); and Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology (KIAT) through the National Innovation Cluster R&D program (P0006691).

References

  1. Seltzer S, Soltanoff W, Sinai I, Goldenberg A, Bender IB. Biologic aspects of endodontics. 3. Periapical tissue reactions to root canal instrumentation. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1968; 26: 694-705. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(68)90442-8
  2. Kim E, Lee SJ. Electronic apex locator. Dent Clin North Am. 2004; 48: 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2003.10.005
  3. Chang HS, Park SH, Cho KM, Kim JW. Accuracy of electronic apex locator in using different Root canal irrigant. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci. 2012; 28: 139-45.
  4. Park SY, Lee DK, Hwang HK. An evaluation of the accuracy of Root ZX according to the conditions of major apical foramen. Restor Dent Endod. 2012; 37: 68-73. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2012.37.2.68
  5. Seltzer S, Soltanoff W, Sinai I, Smith J. Biologic aspects of endodontics. IV. Periapical tissue reactions to root-filled teeth whose canals had been instrumented short of their apices. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1969; 28: 724-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(69)90421-6
  6. Pi CY, Kim ES, Jung IY, Lee SJ. In vivo evaluation of accuracy and consistency of two electronic apex locators. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2010; 35: 453-60. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2010.35.6.453
  7. Custer LE. Exact methods of locating the apical foramen. J Natl Dent Assoc. 1918; 5: 815-9. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1918.0368
  8. Suzuki K. Experimental study on iontophoresis. Jpn J Stomatol. 1942; 16: 411-29. https://doi.org/10.5357/koubyou1927.16.6_411
  9. Sunada I. New method for measuring the length of the root canal. J Dent Res. 1962; 41: 375-87. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345620410020801
  10. Inoue N. An audiometric method for determining the length of root canals. J Can Dent Assoc (Tor). 1973; 39: 630-6.
  11. Yamashita Y. A study of a new electronic root canal measuring device using relative values of frequency response: influences of the diameter of apical foramen, the size of electrode, and the concentration of sodium hypochlorite. Jpn J Conserv Dent. 1990; 33: 547-59.
  12. Kobayashi C, Suda H. New electronic canal measuring device based on the ratio method. J Endod. 1994; 20: 111-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80053-1
  13. Kobayashi C. Electronic canal length measurement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1995; 79: 226-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(05)80288-4
  14. Tosun G, Erdemir A, Eldeniz AU, Sermet U, Sener Y. Accuracy of two electronic apex locators in primary teeth with and without apical resorption: a laboratory study. Int Endod J. 2008; 41: 436-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01389.x
  15. Shabahang S, Goon WW, Gluskin AH. An in vivo evaluation of Root ZX electronic apex locator. J Endod. 1996; 22: 616-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(96)80033-1
  16. Pagavino G, Pace R, Baccetti T. A SEM study of in vivo accuracy of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. J Endod. 1998; 24: 438-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(98)80029-0
  17. Cho YL, Son WH, Hwang HK. An accuracy of the several electronic apex locators on the mesial root canal of the mandibular molar. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2005; 30: 477-85. https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.6.477
  18. Connert T, Judenhofer MS, Hulber-J M, Schell S, Mannheim JG, Pichler BJ, Lost C, ElAyouti A. Evaluation of the accuracy of nine electronic apex locators by using micro-CT. Int Endod J. 2018; 51: 223-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12814
  19. Fouad AF, Krell KV, McKendry DJ, Koorbusch GF, Olson RA. Clinical evaluation of five electronic root canal length measuring instruments. J Endod. 1990; 16: 446-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81889-3
  20. Ricard O, Roux D, Bourdeau L, Woda A. Clinical evaluation of the accuracy of the Evident RCM Mark II apex locator. J Endod. 1991; 17: 567-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81723-1
  21. Gutmann JL, Leonard JE. Problem solving in endodontic working-length determination. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1995; 16: 288, 290, 293-4 passim; quiz 304.
  22. Ounsi HF, Naaman A. In vitro evaluation of the reliability of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. Int Endod J. 1999; 32: 120-3. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.1999.00202.x
  23. Frank AL, Torabinejad M. An in vivo evaluation of Endex electronic apex locator. J Endod. 1993; 19: 177-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)80683-7
  24. Mayeda DL, Simon JH, Aimar DF, Finley K. In vivo measurement accuracy in vital and necrotic canals with the Endex apex locator. J Endod. 1993; 19: 545-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81283-5
  25. Fouad AF, Rivera EM, Krell KV. Accuracy of the Endex with variations in canal irrigants and foramen size. J Endod. 1993; 19: 63-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(06)81196-9