Comparison between two methods of working length determination and its effect on radiographic extent of root canal filling: a clinical study [ISRCTN71486641]

BACKGROUND: Obtaining a correct working length is critical to the success of endodontic therapy. Different methods have been used to identify this crucial measurement. The Aim of this clinical study was to compare the effect of working length determination using apex locator alone or in combination with working length radiograph on the apical extent of root canal filling. METHODS: A total number of 66 patients, 151 canals were randomized into two groups, In group (I) working length was determined by apex locator alone, while in group (II) working length was determined by apex locator confirmed by working length radiograph, length of obturation was assessed, and the total number of radiographs was recorded. The data were analyzed using SAS system and T. tests were carried out. Statistical significance was considered to be P ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: Sixty seven canals in group I were treated with a mean distance from the tip of root canal filling to radiographic apex -0.5 mm ± 0.5 and a mean of a total number of radiographs of 2.0, while in group II eighty four canals were treated with a mean distance from the tip of root canal filling to radiographic apex -0.4 mm ± 0.5 and a mean of a total number of radiographs of 3.2. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean distance from the tip of root filling to radiographic apex between group I and group II (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The practice of using electronic apex locator in the determination of working length is useful and reliable with no statistical difference of the radiographic extent of root canal filling when using apex locator alone or in combination with working length radiograph. Under the clinical conditions of this study, it is suggested that the correct use of an apex locator alone could prevent the need for further diagnostic radiographs for determination of working length. This method can be useful in patients who need not to be exposed to repeated radiation because of mental, medical or oral conditions

Efficacy of rotary instruments with greater taper in preparing oval root canals

AIM: To compare the preparation quality of two rotary systems and NiTi-hand files in oval root canals, and to evaluate the effect of canal dimensions on the preparation. METHODOLOGY: Ninety roots with oval root canals were selected. The middle third was cross sectioned at two levels and photographed. The maximum and minimum diameters of the root and canal were recorded. Teeth were distributed in three groups (n = 30) using stratified randomization, and prepared under simulated clinical conditions with Mtwo, ProTaper, or NiTi-hand files. The pre- and post-preparation photographs were traced and superimposed, the thickness of dentine removed was measured and the ratio of prepared canal outline was calculated. The impact of preparation system and canal dimensions on the quality of the preparation was evaluated using regression analysis. RESULTS: With regards to the ratio of prepared canal outline, no statistical significant difference was found between Mtwo (0.75 [95%CI: 0.69; 0.81]) and ProTaper (0.75 [95%CI: 0.69; 0.80]), but both systems performed significantly better than NiTi-hand files (0.65 [95%CI: 0.60; 0.71]). In six root canals in Mtwo-group (20%), and eight root canals in ProTaper-group (27%), the minimal thickness of dentine-wall after preparation was less than 0.5 mm. In contrast to the maximum diameter of the root canal, the minimum diameter influenced the quality of the preparation (P = 0.0006). CONCLUSIONS: No instrumentation technique was able to circumferentially prepare the oval outline of root canals. Nevertheless, instruments with greater taper (ProTaper and Mtwo) were more efficient than NiTi- hand files, but this was, in some cases, at the expense of remaining dentine-wall thickness

Accuracy of three electronic apex locators in the presence of different irrigating solutions

The present study compared the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) - Elements Diagnostic®, Root ZX® and Apex DSP® - in the presence of different irrigating solutions (0.9% saline solution and 1% sodium hypochlorite). The electronic measurements were carried out by three examiners, using twenty extracted human permanent maxillary central incisors. A size 10 K file was introduced into the root canals until reaching the 0.0 mark, and was subsequently retracted to the 1.0 mark. The gold standard (GS) measurement was obtained by combining visual and radiographic methods, and was set 1 mm short of the apical foramen. Electronic length values closer to the GS (± 0.5 mm) were considered as accurate measures. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to verify inter-examiner agreement. The comparison among the EALs was performed using the McNemar and Kruskal-Wallis tests (p < 0.05). The ICCs were generally high, ranging from 0.8859 to 0.9657. Similar results were observed for the percentage of electronic measurements closer to the GS obtained with the Elements Diagnostic® and the Root ZX® EALs (p > 0.05), independent of the irrigating solutions used. The measurements taken with these two EALs were more accurate than those taken with Apex DSP®, regardless of the irrigating solution used (p < 0.05). It was concluded that Elements Diagnostic® and Root ZX® apex locators are able to locate the cementum-dentine junction more precisely than Apex DSP®. The presence of irrigating solutions does not interfere with the performance of the EALs

Influence of pulp condition on the accuracy of an electronic foramen locator in posterior teeth: an in vivo study

The aim of this study was to assess, in vivo, the accuracy of the NovApex® electronic foramen locator in determining working length (WL) in vital and necrotic posterior teeth. The NovApex®was used in 144 canals: 35 teeth with vital pulps (68 canals) and 42 teeth with necrotic pulps (76 canals). WL was measured with the NovApex® locator and confirmed using the radiographic method. Differences between electronic and radiographic measurements ranging between 0.0 and 0.4 millimeters were classified as acceptable; differences equal to or greater than 0.5 millimeter were considered unacceptable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to assess the influence of pulp condition on the accuracy of NovApex®(a = 0.05). Regardless of pulp condition, differences between electronic and radiographic WL measurements were acceptable in 73.61% of the canals. No statistically significant differences in accuracy were observed when comparing vital and necrotic canals (p > 0.05). There were 38 unacceptable measurements. In none of these cases was the file tip located beyond the radiographic apex; in 32, it was located short of the NovApex® measurement. Pulp condition had no significant effect on the accuracy of NovApex®