Journal
JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
Volume 42, Issue 8, Pages 1263-1267Publisher
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.04.024
Keywords
Apex ID; apical limit; electronic apex locator; micro-computed tomographic imaging; Root ZX; working length
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of 2 electronic apex locators (EALs), Apex ID (SybronEndo, Glendora, CA) and Root ZX (J. Morita, Tokyo, Japan), by means of micro computed tomographic (micro-CT) imaging and to determine anatomic variations that may affect their accuracy. Methods: The root canal length (RCL) and working length (WL) of 33 single-rooted premolars were measured using a visual method, 3-dimensional micro-CT reconstructions, and 2 different EALs. Two different measurements were recorded for each EAL: at the APEX/0.0 mark and at the 0.5 mark. The WL was determined using 2 different methods: method 1: at the 0.5 mark of the apex locator and method 2: subtracting 0.5 mm from the APEX/0.0 mark. The precision of measurements was compared with those recorded by micro-CT imaging. Apical foramen (AF) position and diameter, apical constriction (AC) diameter, distance between the AC and the AF, and the presence/absence of accessory canals were recorded from the micro-CT scans, and their correlation to the accuracy of EALs was determined. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the RCL measurements by any of the different methods. There was a statistically significant difference in the WL recorded by micro-CT imaging compared with those by the visual method and at the APEX/0.0 mark - 0.5 mm (P = .031). There was no difference in the measurements acquired by any of the EALs. The APEX/0.0 mark - 0.5 mm was less accurate than the 0.5 mark. However, the results were not statistically significant (P > .05). The position of the AF and the AC AF distance affected the accuracy of the RCL (P = .003) and the 0.5 mark (P = .013). Conclusions: Root ZX and Apex ID are equally precise in determining the RCL and WL. The 0.5 mark can be used to determine the WL with high precision. Some anatomic variations may influence the accuracy of EALs.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available