In vivo accuracy of conventional and digital radiographic methods in confirming root canal working length determination by Root ZX

Objectives: To compare, in vivo, the accuracy of conventional and digital radiographic methods in determining root canal working length. Material and Methods: Twenty-five maxillary incisor or canine teeth from 22 patients were used in this study. Considering the preoperative radiographs as the baseline, a 25 K file was inserted into the root canal to the point where the Root ZX electronic apex locator indicated the APEX measurement in the screen. From this measurement, 1 mm was subtracted for positioning the file. The radiographic measurements were made using a digital sensor (Digora 1.51) or conventional type-E films, size 2, following the paralleling technique, to determine the distance of the file tip and the radiographic apex. Results: The Student "t" test indicated mean distances of 1.11 mm to conventional and 1.20 mm for the digital method and indicated a significant statistical difference (p<0.05). Conclusions: The conventional radiographic method was found to be superior to the digital one in determining the working length of the root canal.

Effect of pre-flaring and file size on the accuracy of two electronic apex locators

Objective: This ex vivo study evaluated the effect of pre-flaring and file size on the accuracy of the Root ZX and Novapex electronic apex locators (EALs). Material and methods: The actual working length (WL) was set 1 mm short of the apical foramen in the palatal root canals of 24 extracted maxillary molars. The teeth were embedded in an alginate mold, and two examiners performed the electronic measurements using #10, #15, and #20 K-files. The files were inserted into the root canals until the "0.0" or "APEX" signals were observed on the LED or display screens for the Novapex and Root ZX, respectively, retracting to the 1.0 mark. The measurements were repeated after the pre-flaring using the S1 and SX Pro-Taper instruments. Two measurements were performed for each condition and the means were used. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to verify the intra-and inter-examiner agreement. The mean differences between the WL and electronic length values were analyzed by the three-way ANOVA test (p<0.05). Results: ICCs were high (>0.8) and the results demonstrated a similar accuracy for both EALs (p>0.05). Statistically significant accurate measurements were verified in the pre-flared canals, except for the Novapex using a #20 K-file. Conclusions: The tested EALs showed acceptable accuracy, whereas the pre-flaring procedure revealed a more significant effect than the used file size.

Accuracy of five electronic foramen locators with different operating systems: na ex vivo study

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate, ex vivo, the precision of five electronic root canal length measurement devices (ERCLMDs) with different operating systems: the Root ZX, Mini Apex Locator, Propex II, iPex, and RomiApex A-15, and the possible influence of the positioning of the instrument tips short of the apical foramen. Material and Methods: Forty-two mandibular bicuspids had their real canal lengths (RL) previously determined. Electronic measurements were performed 1.0 mm short of the apical foramen (-1.0), followed by measurements at the apical foramen (0.0). The data resulting from the comparison of the ERCLMD measurements and the RL were evaluated by the Wilcoxon and Friedman tests at a significance level of 5%. Results: Considering the measurements performed at 0.0 and -1.0, the precision rates for the ERCLMDs were: 73.5% and 47.1% (Root ZX), 73.5% and 55.9% (Mini Apex Locator), 67.6% and 41.1% (Propex II), 61.7% and 44.1% (iPex), and 79.4% and 44.1% (RomiApex A-15), respectively, considering ±0.5 mm of tolerance. Regarding the mean discrepancies, no differences were observed at 0.0; however, in the measurements at -1.0, the iPex, a multi-frequency ERCLMD, had significantly more discrepant readings short of the apical foramen than the other devices, except for the Propex II, which had intermediate results. When the ERCLMDs measurements at -1.0 were compared with those at 0.0, the Propex II, iPex and RomiApex A-15 presented significantly higher discrepancies in their readings. Conclusions: Under the conditions of the present study, all the ERCLMDs provided acceptable measurements at the 0.0 position. However, at the -1.0 position, the ERCLMDs had a lower precision, with statistically significant differences for the Propex II, iPex, and RomiApex A-15.