• Journal of Korean Dental Science
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.52-58
• /
• 2020

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.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.30 no.6
• /
• pp.477-485
• /
• 2005

The aim of this study was to compare the length between the mesio-buccal and mesio-lingual canal of the mandibular molars before and after early coronal flaring at the different measuring time using several electronic apex locators. Fifty mandibular molars with complete apical formation and patent foramens were selected. After establishing the initial working length of the buccal and lingual canal of the mesial root using a surgical microscope (Carl Zeiss Co Germany) at 25X with #15 K-fle tip just visible at the foramen, radiographs were taken for the working length. After measuring the length of mesio-buccal and mesio-lingual canal (control group), the electronic lengths were measured at different times using several electronic apex locators (experimental groups; I-Root ZX, II-Bingo, III-Propex, IV-Diagnostic). After early coronal flaring using the $K^3$ file, the additional electronic lengths were measured using the same manner The results were as follows: One canal has a correct working length for the mesial root of the mandibular molar, it can be used effectively for measuring the electronic working length of another canal when the files are superimposed or encountered at the apex. In addition, the accuracy of the electronic apex locators was increased as the measurement was accomplished after the early coronal flaring of the root canal and the measuring time was repeated.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.670-675
• /
• 1998

Recently electronic apex locators have been used widely in root canal treatment, but, accuracy of electronic apex locators is controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Apex Finder A.F.A(EIE Analytic Technology, U.S.A.) in vivo compared with Root-Zx and radiograph. The root canal lengths were determined with Root-Zx(32 tooth) in before pulp extirpation and after pulp extirpation. Then the radiographs were taken with a file in the canal. The root canal lengths were determined with Apex Finder A.F.A.(21 tooth) in before pulp extirpation and after pulp extirpation and under NaOCl. Then the radiographs were taken with a file in the canal. The results were as follows: 1. There was no significant statistical difference in Root-Zx between before pulp extirpation and after pulp extirpation(p > 0.05). 2. There was no significant statistical difference in Apex Finder A.F.A. between before pulp extirpation and after pulp extirpation(p > 0.05). But, there was significant statistical difference under NaOCl(p < 0.05). 3. There was no significant statistical difference in accuracy between Root-Zx and Apex Finder A.F.A.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.20-27
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the consistency of two electronic apex locators in vitro model. Materials consisted of fifty two extracted premolars and two electronic apex locators; Root ZX (J. Morita, Osaka, Japan) and E-Magic Finder Deluxe (S-Denti. Cheonan, Korea). After access preparation, the teeth were embedded in a saline-mixed alginate model. Canal lengths of each tooth were measured at "0.5" and "Apex" mark of the apex locators, respectively so that each tooth had two measurements from 0.5 and Apex points. The file was fixed at final measurement using a glass ionomer cement. The apical 4 mm from the apex was exposed to measure the distance from the file tip to the major apical foramen of each tooth. Average distances and standard deviations were used to evaluate the consistency. Results showed that all measurements of both Root ZX and E-Magic Finder located the major foramen the range of ${\pm}0.5\;mm$ level. Both apex locators showed better consistency at Apex mark than at 0.5 mark. The average distance of file tip-major foramen was - 0.18 mm at 0.5 mark and - 0.07 mm at Apex mark in Root ZX, - 0.25 mm at 0.5 mark and - 0.02 mm at Apex mark in E-Magic Finder. Standard deviation was 0.21 at 0.5 mark and 0.12 at Apex mark in Root ZX, 0.12 at 0.5 mark and 0.09 at Apex mark in E-Magic Finder.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.200-205
• /
• 2017

Objectives: The aim of this in vivo study was to assess the accuracy of 2 third-generation electronic apex locators (EALs), Propex II (Dentsply Maillefer) and Root ZX II (J. Morita), and radiographic technique for locating the major foramen (MF). Materials and Methods: Thirty-two premolars with single canals that required extraction were included. Following anesthesia, access, and initial canal preparation with size 10 and 15 K-flex files and SX and S1 rotary ProTaper files, the canals were irrigated with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite. The length of the root canal was verified 3 times for each tooth using the 2 apex locators and once using the radiographic technique. Teeth were extracted and the actual WL was determined using size 15 K-files under a ${\times}25$ magnification. The Biostat 4.0 program (AnalystSoft Inc.) was used for comparing the direct measurements with those obtained using radiographic technique and the apex locators. Pearson's correlation analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for statistical analyses. Results: The measurements obtained using the visual method exhibited the strongest correlation with Root ZX II (r = 0.94), followed by Propex II (r = 0.90) and Ingle's technique (r = 0.81; p < 0.001). Descriptive statistics using ANOVA (Tukey's post hoc test) revealed significant differences between the radiographic measurements and both EALs measurements (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Both EALs presented similar accuracy that was higher than that of the radiographic measurements obtained with Ingle's technique. Our results suggest that the use of these EALs for MF location is more accurate than the use of radiographic measurements.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.5
• /
• pp.371-377
• /
• 2006

The purposes of this study were to assess the accuracy of measurements in pre-enlarged canals with small instruments and to compare the accuracies, in enlarged canal, with small size instruments and instruments that match the actual canal diameter using Root ZX, Bingo1020, SmarPex, and e-Magic Finder. Ten extracted teeth were embedded in an alginate model made for testing apex locators. A size 10 file was placed into the root canal until the tip of the file reached the plane of the major diameter of the foramen under a dental operating microscope at the 25 x magnification. The measurement was done with digital caliper and defined as actual length. Electronic length measurement with a size 10 file in pre-enlarged canal was done by reading the index indicating Apex of each device to gain a definite value After completion of canal enlargement to a size 45 file, each difference between actual length and electric measurement value with a size 10 and 40 files in enlarged canal was recorded as L10 and L40. The one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's multiple range tests were computed for analyze the differences among the four apex locators in the same group. The Student's t-test between L10 and L40 of each locator was done. The accuracies of electronic measurements were significantly different among the 4 devices. The file size made no difference on the accuracy of electronic measurement in enlarged canal with same device. The e-Magic Finder was the most accurate device among the 4 apex locators used in this study.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.6-11
• /
• 2016

Objectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of working length (WL) determination of four electronic apex locators (EALs), namely, Root ZX (RZX), Elements diagnostic unit and apex locator (ELE), SybronEndo Mini Apex locator (MINI) and Propex pixi (PIXI) using Stainless steel (SS) and nickel-titanium (NiTi) hand files. The null hypothesis was that there was no difference between canal length determination by SS and NiTi files of 4 EALs. Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted, single rooted human teeth were decoronated and the canal orifice flared. The actual length (AL) was assessed visually, and the teeth were embedded in an alginate model. The electronic length (EL) measurements were recorded with all four EALs using SS and NiTi files at '0.5' reading on display. The differences between the AL and EL were compared. Results: The results obtained with each EAL with SS and NiTi files were compared with AL. A paired sample t test showed that there was a statistical significant difference between EAL readings with SS and NiTi files for RZX and MINI (p < 0.05). The accuracy of RZX, ELE, MINI and PIXI within ${\pm}0.5 mm$ of AL with SS/NiTi files were 93.3%/70%, 90%/91.7%, 95%/68.3%, and 83.3%/83.3%, respectively. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that Root ZX was statistically more accurate with NiTi files compared to SS files, while MINI was statistically more accurate with SS files compared to NiTi files. ELE and PIXI were not affected by the alloy type of the file used to determine WL.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.31 no.5
• /
• pp.390-397
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and the consistency of four different electronic apex locators in an in vitro model. Fourty extracted premolars were used for the study. Four electronic apex locators (EAL) were Root ZX, Smarpex, Elements Diagnostic Unit (EDU), and E-Magic Finder Deluxe (EMF). After access preparation, the teeth were embedded in an alginate model and the length measurements were carried out at '0.5' and 'Apex' mark using four EALs. The file was cemented at the location of the manufacturers' instruction (Root ZX, EDU, EMF: 0.5 mark, SmarPex: Apex mark). The apical 4mm of the apex was exposed and the distance from the file tip to the major foramen was measured by Image ProPlus (${\times}100$). The distance from the file tip to the major foramen was calculated at 0.5 and Apex mark and the consistency of 0.5 and Apex mark was compared by SD and Quartile of Box plots. In this study, Root ZX and EMF located the apical constriction accurately within ${\pm}0.5 mm$ in 100%, whereas SmarPex and EDU located in 90% and in 70% respectively. For Root ZX and EMF, there was no significant difference between the consistency of 0.5 and Apex mark. However, for the EDU and SmarPex, Apex mark was more consistent than 0.5 mark. From the evaluation of the consistency in this study, for Root ZX and EMF, both 0.5 and Apex mark can be used as a standard mark. And for EDU and SmarPex, the Apex mark can be recommended to be used as a standard mark.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Precision Engineering
• /
• v.24 no.8 s.197
• /
• pp.116-121
• /
• 2007

The length of root canal has to be measured for endodontic treatment. Several electronic apex locators were developed to measure the length of root canal by other researchers. And their accuracies were verified by X-ray or micrometer method. But these methods did not consider the non-linear bends of pulp and had ${\pm}0.5mm$ error which was large enough to measure the length of root canal. The purpose of this study is the introduction of a new method to measure the length of root canal and the verification of the accuracy of an electronic apex locator using a Micro-CT. The length of root canal of 6 teeth were measured with the electronic apex locator. When the electronic apex locator reads 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9 and 1.0 mm length of the file which was inserted in the hole of the tooth to measure the length of root canal. The average (${\pm}$Standard deviation) length of root canal of 6 teeth measured by the Micro-CT was $0.49{\pm}0.03,\;0.59{\pm}0.04,\;0.68{\pm}0.03,\;0.78{\pm}0.03,\;0.90{\pm}0.04\;and\;1.01{\pm}0.03mm$, respectively. The maximum error of the electronic apex locator was 0.06 mm.

• Proceedings of the KOSOMBE Conference
• /
• v.1997 no.11
• /
• pp.399-402
• /
• 1997

It is important to find a accurate root canal length or successful endodontic therapy. By X-ray method takes a long time and difficult in a curved canal. After developed electronic apex locator has allowed to measure the root canal length with easy, in a short time also in a curved canal. But most electronic apex locators have the disadvantage which is too short reading or sometimes the measurement itself becomes impossible if there are electrolytes in the canal. To overcome this drawback, impedance ratio method has been developed. In this study, we have developed frequency dependent electronic apex locator to minimize the interference of electrolytes. And based on that also some error in clinic use, we added the other method. Difference of two signals which are used in calculation of impedance ratio was can be represent the status of root canal fluid. As a result, using impedance ratio method and auto-calibration by voltage difference method can reduce the measurement error.