The Journal of the Korean dental association (대한치과의사협회지)

The Korean Dental Association (대한치과의사협회)
권호 표지

A survey on working length determination of endodontic treatment

근관치료의 근관장 측정에 관한 연구: 근관치료학 전공 교수 설문

  • Ahn, Hye-ra (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University) ;
  • Seo, Min-Seock (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University)
  • 안혜라 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 서민석 (원광대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실)
  • Received : 2016.10.06
  • Accepted : 2016.11.23
  • Published : 2017.01.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the preferred method of root canal length determination and the apical limit for canal instrumentation among endodontic teachers of dental school. A questionnaire on the preferred method of root canal length determination and the apical limit for canal instrumentation was designed and distributed to endodontic teachers of various dental schools. The response rate was 90%. The most preferred method of root canal length determination was Electronic apex locator (EAL)(89%). The most favoured apical limit for canal instrumentation was 0.5 to 1.0 mm short of the radiographic apex(78%). The most preferred method of using EAL was that the working length is taken at 'APEX' mark and then distracted 0.5mm from that length.(41%). When there is no agreement between radiographic measurement and EAL measurement, 74% of respondents chose the length of EAL measurement. The majority of endodontic teachers from Korean dental schools preferred EAL to radiograph method in determining root canal length.

Keywords

References

  1. Ng YL, Mann V, Gulabivala K. A prospective study of the factors affecting outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment: part 1: periapical health. Int Endod J 2011;44(7):583-609. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01872.x
  2. Schaeffer MA, White RR, Walton RE. Determining the optimal obturation length: a meta-analysis of literature. J Endod 2005;31(4):271-274. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000140585.52178.78
  3. Stoll R, Betke K, Stachniss V. The influence of different factors on the survival of root canal fillings: a 10-year retrospective study. J Endod 2005;31(11):783-790. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000158229.43298.a9
  4. Wu MK, Wesselink PR, Walton RE. Apical terminus location of root canal treatment procedures. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000;89(1):99-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1079-2104(00)80023-2
  5. Ricucci D. Apical limit for root canal instrumentation and obturation, part 1. Literature review. Int Endod J 1998;31(6):384-393 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.00184.x
  6. Ricucci D, Langeland K. Apical limit for root canal instrumentation and obturation, part 2. A histological study. Int Endod J 1998;31(6):394-409. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.1998.00183.x
  7. Paul D. Eleazer, Gerald N. Glickman, Scott B. McClanahan et al. Glossary of endodontic terms. American Association of Endodontist 2012 Available at: http://pages.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aae/endodonticglossary/offline/aae_endodonticglossary.pdf
  8. Grove C. Why canals should be filled to the dentinocemental junction. J Am Dent Assoc 1930;17:293-296.
  9. Dummer PM, McGinn JH, Rees DG. The position and topography of the apical canal constriction and apical foramen. Int Endod J 1984;17(4):192-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1984.tb00404.x
  10. Wrbas KT, Ziegler AA, Altenburger MJ,Schirrmeister JF. In vivo comparison of working length determination with two electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 2007;40(2):133-138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01199.x
  11. European Society of Endodontology. Quality guidelines for endodontic treatment: consensus report of the European Society of Endodontology. Int Endod J 2006;39(12):921-930. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2006.01180.x
  12. Simon S, Machtou P, Adams N, Tomson P, Lumley P. Apical limit and working length in endodontics. Dent Update 2009;36(3):146-150,153. https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2009.36.3.146
  13. Palmer NO, Ahmed M, Grieveson B. An investigation of current endodontic practice and training needs in primary care in the north west of England. Br Dent J 2009;206(11):E22. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.473
  14. Stewart K, Gill P, Chadwick B, Treasure E. Qualitative research in dentistry. Br Dent J 2008;204(5):235-239. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2008.149
  15. Ng YL, Mann V, Rahbaran S, Lewsey J, Gulabivala K. Outcome of primary root canal treatment: systemic review of the literature-Part 2. Influence of clinical factors. Int Endod J 2008;41(1):6-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01323.x
  16. Jarad FD, Albadri S, Gamble C, Burnside G, Fox K, Ashley JR, Peers G, Preston AJ. Working length determination in general dental practice: a randomised controlled trial. Br Dent J 2011;211(12):595-598. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2011.1052
  17. Ravanshad S, Adl A, Anvar J. Effect of working length measurement by electronic apex locator or radiography on the adequacy of final working length: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2010;36(11):1753-1756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.017
  18. Orafi I, Rushton VE. The use of radiography and the apex locator in endodontic treatment within the UK: a comparison between endodontic specialists and general dental practitioners. Int Endod J 2013;46(4):355-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02127.x
  19. Mohammed A, Sidhu SK, Chong BS. Root canal working length determination and apical limit of root canal instrumentation and obturation. Endo (Lond Engl) 2015;9(3):161-168.
  20. Savani GM, Sabbah WB ,Sedgley CM, Whitten B. Current Trends in Endodontic Treatment by General Dental Practitioners: Report of a United States National Survey. J Endod 2014;40(5):618-624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.01.029
  21. Orafi I, Rushton VE. The use of radiography and the apex locator in endodontic treatment within the UK: a comparison between endodontic specialists and general dental practitioners. Int Endod J. 2013;46(4):355-64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2012.02127.x
  22. J. Morita Corp. Root ZX operation instructions. Kyoto, Japan, 2004:10.
  23. Dummer PM, McGinn JH, Rees DG. The position and topography of the apical canal constriction and apical foramen. Int Endod J 1984;17(4):192-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.1984.tb00404.x
  24. Piasecki L, Carneiro E, da Silva Neto UX, Westphalen VP, Brandoo CG, Gambarini G, Azim AA. The Use of Micro-Computed Tomography to Determine the Accuracy of 2 Electronic Apex Locators and Anatomic Variations Affecting Their Precision. J Endod. 2016;42(8):1263-1267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.04.024
  25. Jung IY, Yoon BH, Lee SJ, Lee SJ. Comparison of the reliability of "0.5" and "APEX" mark measurements in two frequency-based electronic apex locators. J Endod. 2011;37(1):49-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.048
  26. Siu C, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. An in vivo comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by using rotary nickeltitanium files. J Endod 2009;35(7):962-965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025
  27. Pascon EA, Marrelli M, Congi O, Ciancio R, Miceli F, Versiani MA. An in vivo comparison of working length determination of two frequency-based electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 2009;42(11):1026-1031. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2009.01615.x
  28. Gulabivala K, Stock C. Endodontics. 3rd edition. Mosby; 2004:142-124.
  29. Martins JN, Marques D, Mata A, Carames J. Clinical efficacy of electronicapex locators: systematic review. J Endod. 2014;40(6):759-777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.03.011