Effectiveness of three electronic apex locators to determine root canal working length

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining working length (WL) using hand files and a wear technique. Thirty two premolars that were completely formed apically and that were scheduled for extraction for orthodontic reasons from patients between ages of 15 and 20 years old were included. Electronic measurement of WL was performed using the EAL according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The following three EAL were used: A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, and C. Propex II. There were significant difference (p = 0,0002) when comparing median differences among the three EAL. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 and Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), while between Raypex 5 and Propex II, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to the accuracy of the EAL in determining WL (p = 0,1087). The present findings suggest that Root ZX II presented the highest agreement rate for determining the final WL.El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar in vivo la exactitud de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos (LAEs) para determinar la longitud de trabajo (LT) usando instrumentos manuales y una técnica de desgaste. Treinta y dos premolares con formación apical completa e indicados para extracción por razones ortodóncicas de pacientes de edad entre 15 y 20 años fueron incluidos en el estudio. Se usaron tres LAE; A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, y C. Propex II. Se encontraron diferencias significativas (p = 0,0002) cuando se compararon las medianas entre los tres LAE. El análisis mostró diferencias entre Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 y Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), mientras que entre Raypex 5 y Propex II, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la determinación de la LT (p = 0,1087). Los presentes hallazgos sugieren que Root ZX II mostró la mayor exactitud para determinar la LT final

Efectividad de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos para determinar la longitud radicular de trabajo.

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining working length (WL) using hand files and a wear technique. Thirty two premolars that were completely formed apically and that were scheduled for extraction for orthodontic reasons from patients between ages of 15 and 20 years old were included. Electronic measurement of WL was performed using the EAL according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The following three EAL were used: A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, and C. Propex II. There were significant difference (p = 0,0002) when comparing median differences among the three EAL. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 and Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), while between Raypex 5 and Propex II, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to the accuracy of the EAL in determining WL (p = 0,1087). The present findings suggest that Root ZX II presented the highest agreement rate for determining the final WL.El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar in vivo la exactitud de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos (LAEs) para determinar la longitud de trabajo (LT) usando instrumentos manuales y una técnica de desgaste. Treinta y dos premolares con formación apical completa e indicados para extracción por razones ortodóncicas de pacientes de edad entre 15 y 20 años fueron incluidos en el estudio. Se usaron tres LAE; A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, y C. Propex II. Se encontraron diferencias significativas (p = 0,0002) cuando se compararon las medianas entre los tres LAE. El análisis mostró diferencias entre Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 y Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), mientras que entre Raypex 5 y Propex II, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la determinación de la LT (p = 0,1087). Los presentes hallazgos sugieren que Root ZX II mostró la mayor exactitud para determinar la LT final

Effectiveness of three electronic apex locators to determine root canal working length

The aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining working length (WL) using hand files and a wear technique. Thirty two premolars that were completely formed apically and that were scheduled for extraction for orthodontic reasons from patients between ages of 15 and 20 years old were included. Electronic measurement of WL was performed using the EAL according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The following three EAL were used: A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, and C. Propex II. There were significant difference (p = 0,0002) when comparing median differences among the three EAL. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 and Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), while between Raypex 5 and Propex II, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to the accuracy of the EAL in determining WL (p = 0,1087). The present findings suggest that Root ZX II presented the highest agreement rate for determining the final WL.El objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar in vivo la exactitud de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos (LAEs) para determinar la longitud de trabajo (LT) usando instrumentos manuales y una técnica de desgaste. Treinta y dos premolares con formación apical completa e indicados para extracción por razones ortodóncicas de pacientes de edad entre 15 y 20 años fueron incluidos en el estudio. Se usaron tres LAE; A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, y C. Propex II. Se encontraron diferencias significativas (p = 0,0002) cuando se compararon las medianas entre los tres LAE. El análisis mostró diferencias entre Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 y Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), mientras que entre Raypex 5 y Propex II, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la determinación de la LT (p = 0,1087). Los presentes hallazgos sugieren que Root ZX II mostró la mayor exactitud para determinar la LT final

Threats, challenges and opportunities for paediatric environmental health in Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean.

Also version in englishIn a world that is increasingly technological and interconnected, but also more violent, overexploited and polluted, Paediatric Environmental Health (PEH) is one of the best contributions to improve global health. Few areas of the planet have a high affinity with common values and interests, such as the European Union (EU), Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). The investments and actions of the PEH in pre- and postnatal periods during the first two decades of life will generate countless benefits in the health and well-being during the human life span. Detecting, reducing, or eliminating physical, chemical, biological and social pollutants is one of the main missions and actions of the PEH. In this special article, an update review is presented on the threats, challenges and cooperation opportunities in PEH among bio-health professionals and other social sectors involved, from the EU and LAC. New professional profiles, knowledge structures and architectures for engagement emerge. Courageous leaderships, new substantial resources, broad social changes, and the necessary collaboration between the two regions will be required to improve the health of present and future generations.International Network Environment, Survival and Childhood Cancer (ENSUCHICA) in Europe and Latin America (FFIS EU17-01-01); National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities NIH (T37 MD001452); Fund. Séneca (MUR#19884-GERM-15); ICARUS (Horizon 2020: 690105); SaludAire-España (PI18CIII/00022); FIS 12/01416 y PI16CIII/00009.S

Switching TNF antagonists in patients with chronic arthritis: An observational study of 488 patients over a four-year period

The objective of this work is to analyze the survival of infliximab, etanercept and adalimumab in patients who have switched among tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonists for the treatment of chronic arthritis. BIOBADASER is a national registry of patients with different forms of chronic arthritis who are treated with biologics. Using this registry, we have analyzed patient switching of TNF antagonists. The cumulative discontinuation rate was calculated using the actuarial method. The log-rank test was used to compare survival curves, and Cox regression models were used to assess independent factors associated with discontinuing medication. Between February 2000 and September 2004, 4,706 patients were registered in BIOBADASER, of whom 68% had rheumatoid arthritis, 11% ankylosing spondylitis, 10% psoriatic arthritis, and 11% other forms of chronic arthritis. One- and two-year drug survival rates of the TNF antagonist were 0.83 and 0.75, respectively. There were 488 patients treated with more than one TNF antagonist. In this situation, survival of the second TNF antagonist decreased to 0.68 and 0.60 at 1 and 2 years, respectively. Survival was better in patients replacing the first TNF antagonist because of adverse events (hazard ratio (HR) for discontinuation 0.55 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-0.84)), and worse in patients older than 60 years (HR 1.10 (95% CI 0.97-2.49)) or who were treated with infliximab (HR 3.22 (95% CI 2.13-4.87)). In summary, in patients who require continuous therapy and have failed to respond to a TNF antagonist, replacement with a different TNF antagonist may be of use under certain situations. This issue will deserve continuous reassessment with the arrival of new medications. © 2006 Gomez-Reino and Loreto Carmona; licensee BioMed Central Ltd