Home  About us  Contact
 

Electronic Measurement (electronic + measurement)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Medical Sciences100%

Selected Abstracts

Ex vivo evaluation of the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators using a simple mounting model: a preliminary report

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 4 2010
F. L. C. D'Assunção
D'Assunção FLC, Albuquerque DS, Salazar-Silva JR, Dos Santos VC, Sousa JCN.Ex vivo evaluation of the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators using a simple mounting model: a preliminary report. International Endodontic Journal, 43, 269,274, 2010. Abstract Aim, To compare ex vivo the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators in locating the apical constriction. Methodology, Thirty-one single-rooted teeth were used. The teeth were sectioned at the cement,-enamel junction. A mounting model was used for the measurement of electronic length (EL). The Root ZX-II, the Mini Apex Locator and the Novapex were used for electronic measurements. Each electronic measurement was obtained and repeated. After the last measurement, the file was cemented in place, and the apical 4 mm of each root canal was exposed. The distance from the tip of the file to the apical constriction was determined by three investigators and compared with the corresponding ELs. Results, The coefficient of repeatability of all devices was acceptable: Root ZX-II, 0.04 mm; Mini Apex Locator, 0.10 mm; and Novapex, 0.08 mm. There was little variation in inter-examiner agreement; the ,C (Lin) correlation coefficient was 0.83 for examiners 1 and 2, 0.88 for examiners 1 and 3 and 0.99 for examiners 2 and 3. Using the Root ZX-II, 13 of 31 electronic measurements were located at the apical constriction (42%). Otherwise, the tip of the file was not located at the apical constriction in any of the electronic measurements with the other two devices. The Wilcoxon signed rank test did not reveal any statistical difference between the Root ZX-II measurements and the actual length (P = 0.628), but there was a statistical difference between the Mini Apex Locator and Novapex measurements and the actual length position (P < 0.05). Conclusions, The devices tested in this study had a high coefficient of repeatability. The Root ZX-II was accurate, but the Mini Apex Locator and Novapex were not accurate in locating the apical constriction. [source]

In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of five different electronic apex locators for determining the working length of endodontically retreated teeth

AUSTRALIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 1 2007
Aqeel Khalil Ebrahim bds
Abstract The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of five electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining the working length (WL) of teeth after removal of the root canal obturation materials. A total of 32 extracted straight, single-rooted teeth were used. The actual canal length (AL) was determined and the WL was established by subtracting 0.5 mm from the AL. The root canals were instrumented and divided into two groups. One group (n = 6) served as control, while the other group (n = 26) was the experimental group. In the experimental group, the root canals were obturated using vertically compacted gutta-percha with AH 26 sealer. In both groups, the access cavities were restored with a provisional restoration and stored for 15 days at 37°C and 100% humidity. The root canal obturation material was removed, and the teeth were then mounted in an experimental apparatus. Five EALs were used: Dentaport ZXTM®, ProPex, Foramatron D10, Apex NRG and Apit 7. For the electronic measurement of canal length, a size 25 K-file was used. During measurement, the canal was irrigated with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite. The difference (D) between the AL and the electronically determined length (EDL), AL,EDL, was calculated and recorded for each measurement. Data were analysed by two-way anova and Fisher's PLSD test. In both groups, statistically significant differences were found among the EALs (P < 0.01). In conclusion, the Dentaport ZXTM®, ProPex and Foramatron D10 were more accurate than the other two EALs in determining the WL in teeth after removal of the root canal obturation materials. However, the Apex NRG and Apit 7 were also reliable for determination of the WL in the majority of the cases. [source]

Accuracy of three different electronic apex locators in detecting simulated horizontal and vertical root fractures

AUSTRALIAN ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 2 2006
Aqeel K. Ebrahim bds
Abstract The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs): Root ZX, Foramatron D10 and Apex NRG, in the detection of fractures in teeth having simulated horizontal and vertical root fractures. A total of 90 extracted intact, straight, single-rooted teeth were divided into six groups of 15 teeth each. In Groups A, B and C, an incomplete horizontal fracture was simulated by preparing a horizontal incision in the coronal, middle or apical portion of the root until the circumferential half of the canal was exposed in the horizontal plane respectively. In Groups D, E and F, an incomplete vertical root fracture was simulated by preparing a vertical straight incision to expose the canal in the coronal, middle or apical portion of the root all the way in the longitudinal plane respectively. The simulated fractures were 0.25 mm in thickness in all groups. The teeth were embedded in 1% agar and the canals were irrigated with saline solution during electronic measurement. Detection of the simulated root fractures was established with a size 10 K-file when the meter value reached ,APEX' on each EAL. In Groups A, B and C, Kruskal,Wallis tests revealed that there were no statistically significant differences between the three EALs. However, statistically significant differences were found among the EALs in Groups D, E and F (P < 0.0001, one-way anova and Tukey's post-hoc test). In conclusion, the three EALs tested were accurate and acceptable clinical tools in the detection of horizontal root fractures. However, the three EALs were unreliable in detecting the position of vertical root fractures. [source]

Ex vivo evaluation of the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators using a simple mounting model: a preliminary report

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 4 2010
F. L. C. D'Assunção
D'Assunção FLC, Albuquerque DS, Salazar-Silva JR, Dos Santos VC, Sousa JCN.Ex vivo evaluation of the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators using a simple mounting model: a preliminary report. International Endodontic Journal, 43, 269,274, 2010. Abstract Aim, To compare ex vivo the accuracy and coefficient of repeatability of three electronic apex locators in locating the apical constriction. Methodology, Thirty-one single-rooted teeth were used. The teeth were sectioned at the cement,-enamel junction. A mounting model was used for the measurement of electronic length (EL). The Root ZX-II, the Mini Apex Locator and the Novapex were used for electronic measurements. Each electronic measurement was obtained and repeated. After the last measurement, the file was cemented in place, and the apical 4 mm of each root canal was exposed. The distance from the tip of the file to the apical constriction was determined by three investigators and compared with the corresponding ELs. Results, The coefficient of repeatability of all devices was acceptable: Root ZX-II, 0.04 mm; Mini Apex Locator, 0.10 mm; and Novapex, 0.08 mm. There was little variation in inter-examiner agreement; the ,C (Lin) correlation coefficient was 0.83 for examiners 1 and 2, 0.88 for examiners 1 and 3 and 0.99 for examiners 2 and 3. Using the Root ZX-II, 13 of 31 electronic measurements were located at the apical constriction (42%). Otherwise, the tip of the file was not located at the apical constriction in any of the electronic measurements with the other two devices. The Wilcoxon signed rank test did not reveal any statistical difference between the Root ZX-II measurements and the actual length (P = 0.628), but there was a statistical difference between the Mini Apex Locator and Novapex measurements and the actual length position (P < 0.05). Conclusions, The devices tested in this study had a high coefficient of repeatability. The Root ZX-II was accurate, but the Mini Apex Locator and Novapex were not accurate in locating the apical constriction. [source]

Distance from file tip to the major apical foramen in relation to the numeric meter reading on the display of three different electronic apex locators

INTERNATIONAL ENDODONTIC JOURNAL, Issue 12 2009
R. A. Higa
Abstract Aim, To establish and compare the relationship between the distance from the file tip to the apical foramen and the numeric meter reading on the display of three different electronic apex locators (EALs). Methodology, A total of 12 extracted intact, straight, single-rooted human teeth with complete roots were used. The actual root canal length (AL) was determined after access preparation. For the electronic measurements with each EAL, silicon stops were fixed with auto-polymerizing resin to size 15 K-files at AL and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 mm short of AL. The data was analysed by two-way anova and Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) test for multiple comparisons amongst EALs. Additionally, one-way anova and Tukey's HSD test were carried out for multiple comparisons amongst the measurements of each EAL. Results, There was a statistically significant difference amongst all EALs in indicating the position of file tips in relation to the major foramen (P < 0.05). The correlation between the meter reading and the position of the file tip from the apical foramen was statistically significant in the three EALs. There were significant differences amongst the measurements at distances from 0 to 2 mm in Justy III. In Dentaport, significant differences were found from 0 to 1 mm. However, the E-Magic Finder showed significant differences from 0 to 0.5 mm. Conclusions, Justy III was more capable of displaying the intracanal position of the file tip from the major foramen in mm whilst advancing through the root canal during electronic measurements than the Dentaport and E-Magic Finder Deluxe. [source]