Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of two electronic apex locators on human cadavers

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study on human cadavers was to compare the accuracy of two electronic apex locators (EALs) Dentaport ZX (J. Morita Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and Raypex 6 (VDW, Munich, Germany).

Materials and methods

Twenty-two single rooted teeth of four human cadaver heads were scheduled for this study. Before the extraction, an access cavity was opened and the crown was cut to establish a stable reference point for all measurements. The working length determination was performed with Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 in the presence or not of 5.25 % sodium hypochlorite (SH) using a k-file 10. The teeth were then extracted and the real working length (RWL) was measured under a stereomicroscope at ×30 magnification. The difference between the two working lengths was calculated: positive values indicate measurements exceeding the foramen, while negative values indicated measurements short of the foramen. The data were analyzed with a t test analysis.

Results

The mean of distances was 0.33 ± 0.20 mm and 0.32 ± 0.2 mm for Dentaport ZX respectively in the presence or not of SH and 0.38 ± 0.20 mm and 0.39 ± 0.19 mm for Raypex 6. No statistical differences were found between the two devices (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Both apex locators showed a high accuracy in the presence or not of SH.

Clinical relevance

Both electronic apex locators can be recommended for clinical use and their accuracy is not affected by SH.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Estrela C, Estrela CR, Decurcio DA, Hollanda AC, Silva JA (2007) Antimicrobial efficacy of ozonated water, gaseous ozone, sodium hypochlorite and chlorhexidine in infected human root canals. Int Endod J 40:85–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kuttler Y (1955) Microscopic investigation of root apexes. J Am DentAssoc 50:545–552

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gordon MP, Chandler NP (2004) Electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 37:425–437

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dummer PMH, McGinn JH, Rees DG (1984) The position and topography of the apical canal constriction and apical foramen. Int Endod J 17:192–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ricucci D, Langeland K (1998) Apical limit of root canal instrumentation and obturation, part 2. A histological study. Int Endod J 31:394–409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Basmadjian-Charles CL, Farge P, Bourgeois DM, Lebrun T (2002) Factors influencing the long term results of endodontic treatment: a review of the literature. Int Dent J 52:81–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kojima K, Inamoto K, Nagamatsu K, et al. (2004) Success rate of endodontic treatment of teeth with vital and nonvital pulps. A meta-analysis. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 97:95–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Real DG, Davidowicz H, Moura-Netto C (2011) Accuracy of working length determination using 3 electronic apex locators and direct digital radiography. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontics 111:44–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shanmugaraj M, Nivedha R, Mathan R, Balagopal S (2007) Evaluation of working length determination methods: an in vivo/ex vivo study. Indian Dent Res 18:60–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gutierrez JH, Aguayo P (1995) Apical foraminal openings in human teeth. Number and location. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 79:769–777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Vieyra JP, Acosta J, Mondaca JM (2010) Comparison of working length determination with radiographs and two electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 43:16–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Martins JN, Marques D, Mata A, Caramês J (2014) Clinical efficacy of electronic apex locators: systematic review. J Endod 40:759–777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pratten H, Mc Donald JN (1996) Comparison of radiographic and electronic working lengths. J Endod 22:173–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mayeda DL, Simon JH, Aimar DF, Finley K (1993) In vivo measurement accuracy in vital and necrotic canals with the Endex apex locator. J Endod 19:545–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shabahang S, Goon WW, Gluskin AH (1996) An in vivo evaluation of Root ZX electronic apex locator. J Endod 22:616–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Venturi M, Breschi L (2007) A comparison between two electronic apex locators: an ex vivo investigation. Int Endod 40:362–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pagavino G, Pace R, Baccetti T (1998) A SEM study of in vivo accuracy of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. J Endod 24:438–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Weiger R, John C, Geigle H, Löst C (1999) An in vitro comparison of two modern apex locators. J Endod 25:765–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Welk AR, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG (2003) An in vivo comparison of two frequency-based electronic apex locators. J Endod 29:497–500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ozsezer E, Inan U, Aydin U (2007) In vivo evaluation of ProPex electronic apex locator. J Endod 33:974–977

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Meares WA, Steiman HR (2009) The influence of sodium hypochlorite irrigation on the accuracy of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. J Endod 28:595–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim E, Lee SJ (2004) Electronic apex locator. Dent Clin N Am 48:35–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Guise GM, Goodell GG, Imamura GM (2010) In vitro comparison of three electronic apex locators. J Endod 36:279–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Columb MO, Stevens A (2008) Power analysis and sample size calculations. Curr Anaesth Crit Care 19:12–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee SJ, Nam KC, Kim YJ, Kim DW (2002) Clinical accuracy of a new apex locator with an automatic compensation circuit. J Endod 28:706–709

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ounsi HF, Naaman A (1999) In vitro evaluation of the reliability of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. Int Endod J 32:120–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stöber EK, de Ribot J, Mercadé M, Vera J, Bueno R, Roig M, Duran-Sindreu F (2011) Evaluation of the Raypex 5 and the Mini Apex Locator: an in vivo study. J Endod 37:1349–1352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Duran-Sindreu F, Gomes S, Stöber E, Mercadé M, Jané L, Roig M (2013) In vivo evaluation of the iPex and Root ZX electronic apex locators using various irrigants. Int Endod J 46:769–774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gomes S, Oliver R, Macouzet C, Mercadé M, Roig M, Duran-Sindreu F (2012) In vivo evaluation of the Raypex 5 by using different irrigants. J Endod 38:1075–1057

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lucena C, Lopez JM, Martın JA, Robles V, Gonzalez-Rodrıguez MP (2014) Accuracy of working length measurement: electronic apex locator versus cone-beam computed tomography. Int Endod J 47:246–256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Carlo Rossini for the correction of the article and Dr. Ezio Bassotti for the photos at the stereomicroscope.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Largo A. Gemelli, 8, 00168, Rome, Italy

    Luca Marigo

  2. Institute of Translational Research of Locomotor Apparatus Nicola Cerulli –LPMRI- srl, Via A. Einstein, 12 /L, 52100, Arezzo, Italy

    Gian Luca Gervasi

  3. Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Largo A. Gemelli, 8, 00168, Rome, Italy

    Francesco Somma & Raffaella Castagnola

  4. Via Murat, 98, 70122, Bari, Italy

    Giuseppe Squeo

Authors
  1. Luca Marigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gian Luca Gervasi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesco Somma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Giuseppe Squeo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Raffaella Castagnola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raffaella Castagnola.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marigo, L., Gervasi, G.L., Somma, F. et al. Comparison of two electronic apex locators on human cadavers. Clin Oral Invest 20, 1547–1550 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1644-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1644-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation