• 치과방사선
• /
• 제28권2호
• /
• pp.435-459
• /
• 1998

In order to achieve a successful endodontic treatment, root canals must be obturated three-dimensionally without causing any damage to apical tissues. Accurate length determination of the root canal is critical in this case. For this reason, I've used the conventional periapical radiography, Digora/sup (R)/(digital imaging system) and Root ZX/sup (R)/(the frequency dependent type apex locator) to measure the length of the canal and compare it with the true length obtained by cutting the tooth in half and measuring the length between the occlusal surface and the apical foramen. From the information obtained by these measurements, I was able to evaluate the accuracy and clinical usefulness of each systems. whether the thickness of files used in endodontic therapy has any effect on the measuring systems was also evaluated in an effort to simplify the treatment planning phase of endodontic treatment. 29 canals of 29 sound premolars were measured with #15, #20, #25 files by 3 different dentists each using the periapical radiography. Digora/sup (R)/ and Root ZX/sup (R)/. The measurements were then compared with the true length. The results were as follows: 1. In comparing mean discrepancies between measurements obtained by using periapical radiography(mean error: -0.449±0.444 mm), Digora/sup (R)/(mean error: -0.417±0.415 mm) and Root ZX/sup (R)/(mean error: 0.123±0.458 mm) with true length. periapical radiography and Digora/sup (R)/ system had statistically significant differences(p<0.05) in most cases while Root ZX/sup (R)/ showed none(p>0.05). 2. By subtracting values obtained by using periapical radiography, Digora/sup (R)/ and Root ZX/sup (R)/ from the true length and making a distribution table of their absolute values. the following analysis was possible. In the case of periapical film. 140 out of 261<53.6％) were clinically acceptable satisfying the margin of error of less than 0.5 mm. 151 out of 261 (53,6％) were acceptable in the Digora/sup (R)/ system while Root ZX/sup (R)/ had 197 out of 261(75.5％) within the limits of 0.5mm margin of error. 3. In determining whether the thickness of files has any effect on measuring methoths, no statistically significant differences were found(p>0.05). 4. In comparing data obtained from these methods in order to evaluate the difference among measuring methods, there was no statistically significant difference between periapical radiography and Digora/sup (R)/ system(p>0.05), but there was statistically significant difference between Root ZX/sup (R)/ and periapical radiography(p<0.05). Also there was statistically significant difference between Root ZX/sup (R)/ and Digora/sup (R)/ system(p<0.05). In conclusion, Root ZX/sup (R)/ was more accurate when compared with the Digora/sup (R)/ system and periapical radiography and seems to be more effective clinically in determining root canal length. But Root ZX/sup (R)/ has its limits in determining root morphology and number of roots and its accuracy becomes questionable when apical foramen is open due to unknown reasons. Therefore the combined use of Root ZX/sup (R)/ and the periapical radiography are mandatory. Digora/sup (R)/ system seems to be more effective when periapical radiographs are needed in a short period of time because of its short processing time and less exposure.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.578-584
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this experiment was to determine: (1) the safe automatic apical reverse setting that prevents overinstrumentation of the root canal, using Tri Auto ZX$^{(R)}$ and (2) the effect of various irrigant on such instrumentation. The instrumentation was carried out with the automatic apical reverse setting of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0. The root canal irrigants used in usual manner were normal saline(0.9%), NaOCl(2.5%), and RC Prep$^{(R)}$. For each reverse setting and each irrigant, ten teeth were used with the total of 120 teeth. The distance between the file tip and the apical constriction was determined by stereomicroscope using the point that the file began to rotate in reverse direction. When the reverse setting mode was set to 0.5, 18 of 30 were overinstrumented. If these were discriminated by irrigant, 10 of 6 with 0.9% saline, 10 of 6 with NaOCl, and 10 of 6 with RC Prep$^{(R)}$ has the file tip located 0.57${\pm}$0.30mm, 0.73${\pm}$0.39mm, and 0.26${\pm}$0.25mm beyond the apical constriction respectively. In 1.0 setting 15 of 29 were over the apical constriction, and the distribution was 6 in saline, 5 in NaOCl, and 4 in RC Prep$^{(R)}$. The mean distance over the apical constriction was 0.28${\pm}$0.13mm with saline, 0.75${\pm}$0.61mm with NaOCl, and 0.25${\pm}$0.17mm with RC Prep$^{(R)}$. When the autoatic reverse mode was set to 1.5, and 2.0, 5, and 1 teeth were found to be overinstrumented in respective settings. But there were large variations in overinstrumented distances when an attempt was made to compare the effect of irrigants on this overinstrumentations and they were meaningless for the small sample size. When all of the autoreverse setting were combined to compare the number of overinstrumented teeth with each irrigant, there were no significant differences (14 for normal saline, 12 for NaOCl, 13 for RC Prep$^{(R)}$). When 0.5 or 1.0 automatic apical reverse setting mode was used the Tri Auto ZX$^{(R)}$ in clinical application, the possibility of overinstrumentation beyond the apical constriction exists in 55.9% of cases. Therefore 1.5 or 2.0 setting is safer for the preparation inside the canal but this type setting needs additional apical hand preparation of the root canal because the accuracy is lower than 0.5 or 1.0 setting.