Raypex 5, Raypex 6, Ipex ve Ipex II Elektronik Apeks Bulucularının Doğruluğunun Karşılaştırmalı Olarak Değerlendirilmesi: In Vitro Çalışma

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı iPex II cihazı ile elde edilen
ölçümlerin doğruluğunu değerlendirmek ve bunları Raypex
5, Raypex 6 ve iPex multi-frekans elektronik apeks bulucuları
(EAB) ile elde edilen ölçümlerle karşılaştırmaktır.
Gereç ve Yöntem: 30 adet yeni çekilmiş insan alt küçük
azı dişi kronlarından ayrıldı ve kök kanalları koronale
açılı olarak genişletildi. 10 numara K tipi eğenin ucu
apikal foramende görülene kadar ilerletilerek gerçek
çalışma boyu (GÇB) belirlendi. Dişler aljinata gömüldü
ve elektronik çalışma boyunu (EÇB) ölçmek için her bir
apeks bulucu rastgele test edildi. GÇB ve EÇB arasındaki
farklar istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırıldı.
Bulgular: Apeks buluculardan elde edilen ölçümler
arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark saptanmadı.
Bu çalışmanın verileri ±0.5 mm aralığında EÇB ölçümünün
Raypex 5 kullanılan örneklerde %64.29, Raypex 6
kullanılanlarda %53.58, iPex kullanılanlarda %64.29 ve
iPex II kullanılanlarda %50 oranında doğru olduğunu
gösterdi.
Sonuç: Bu in vitro çalışmanın sınırları dahilinde, iPex
II cihazı kullanılarak yapılan ölçümlerin doğruluğunun,
bu çalışmada kullanılan diğer çok frekanslı EABlardan
elde edilenlerin doğruluğu ile benzer olduğu sonucuna
varılmıştır

Keywords

• Elektronik apeks bulucu
• iPex II
• Raypex 6
• kök kanal tedavisi
• çalışma boyu

A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE ACCURACIES OF RAYPEX 5, RAYPEX 6, IPEX AND IPEX II ELECTRONIC APEX LOCATORS: AN IN VITRO STUDY

Abstract

Purpose: The aims of this study were to examine the accuracy of iPex II and to compare it with those of Raypex 5, Raypex 6 and iPex electronic apex locators (EALs).

Materials and Methods: Thirty fresh human mandibular premolar teeth were used in this study. Crown segments were cut and root canals were coronally flared. A #10 K-file was inserted until its tip can be seen within apical foramen to determine actual working length (AWL). Teeth were embedded in alginate and each multi-frequency EALs were randomly tested to determine the electronic working length (EWL). Differences between AWLs and EWLs were statistically compared.

Results: No significant differences were found between four EALs. EWL measurements by Raypex 5 were accurate in 64.29%, Raypex 6 in 53.58%, iPex in 64.29% and iPex II in 50% of the specimens, within the range of ±0.5 mm from the AWL.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in vitro experiment, our findings indicate that the accuracy of working length measurements calculated with iPex II was similar to those of other multi-frequency EALs used in this study.

Keywords

• Electronic apex locator
• iPex II
• Raypex 6
• root canal treatment
• working length

References

1. Inoue N, Skinner DH. A simple and accurate way to measuring root canal length. J Endod 1985;11(10):421-427.
2. American Association of Endodontists. Glossary of Endodontic Terms. 7th edn. Chicago: AAE; 2003.
3. Chugal NM, Clive JM, Spangberg LS. Endodontic infection: some biologic and treatment factors associated with outcome. Oral Sug Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2003;96(1):81-90.
4. Real DG, Davidowicz H, Moura-Netto C,ZenknerCde L, Pagliarin CM, Barletta FB, de Moura AA. Accuracy of working length determination using 3 electronic apex locators and direct digital radiography. Oral Sug Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2011;111(3):e44-e49.
5. Koçak S, Koçak MM, Sağlam BC. Efficiency of 2 electronic apex locators on working length determination: A clinical study. J Conserv Dent 2013;16(3):229-232.
6. ChakravarthyPishipati KV. An in vitro comparison of Propex II apex locator to standard radiographic method. Iran Endod J 2013;8(3):114-117.
7. Pratten DH, McDonald NJ. Comparison of radiographic and electronic working lengths. J Endod 1996;22(4):173-176.
8. Fouad AF, Reid LC. Effect of using electronic apex locators on selected endodontic treatment parameters. J Endod 2000;26(6):364-367.

9. ElAyouti A, Weiger R, Löst C. The ability of Root ZX apex locator to reduce the frequency of overestimated radiographic working length. J Endod 2002;28(2):116-119.
10. McDonald NJ. The electronic determination of working length. Dent Clin North Am 1992;36(2):293-307.
11. Stein TJ, Corcoran JF. Radiographic ‘‘working length’’ revisited. Oral Sug Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1992;74(6):796-800.
12. Hoer D, Attin T. The accuracy of electronic working length determination. Int Endod J 2004;37(2):125-131.
13. Cianconi L, Angotti V, Felici R, Conte G, Mancini M. Accuracy of three electronic apex locators compared with digital radiography: an ex vivo study. J Endod 2010;36(12):2003-2007.
14. Suzuki K. Experimental study on iontophoresis. Japanese J Stomatol 1942;16:411-429.
15. Sunada I. New method for measuring the length of the root canal. J Dent Res 1962; 41(2):375-387.
16. Ricucci D. Apical limit of root canal instrumentation and obturation, part 1: literature review. Int Endod J 1998;31(6):384-393.
17. ElAyouti A, Weiger R, Löst C. Frequency of over instrumentation with an acceptable radiographic working length. J Endod 2001;27(1):49-52.
18. Puri N, Chadha R, Kumar P, Puri K. An in vitro comparison of root canal length determination by DentaPort ZX and iPex apex locators. J Conserv Dent 2013;16(6):555-558.
19. Carotte P. Endodontics: Part 7-preparing the root canal. Br Dent J 2004;197(10):603-613.
20. Herrera M, Abalos C, Lucena C, Jiménez-Planas A, Llamas R. Critical diameter of apical foramen and of file size using the Root ZX apex locater: an in vitro study. J Endod 2011; 37(9):1306-1309.
21. Plotino G, Grande NM, Brigante L, Lesti B, Somma F. Ex vivo accuracy of three electronic apex locators: Root ZX, Elements Diagnostic Unit and Apex Locator and Propex. Int Endod J 2006;39(5):408-414.
22. Fouad AF, Krell KV, McKendry DJ, Koorbusch GF, Olson RA. Clinical evaluation of five electronic root canal length measurements. J Endod 1990;16(9):446-449.
23. Czerw RJ, Fulkerson MS, Donelly JC. An in vitro test of a simplified model to demonstrate the operation of electronic root canal measuring devices. J Endod 1994;20(12):605-606.
24. Duran-Sindreu F, Stöber E, Mercadé M, Vera J, Garcia M, Bueno R, Roig M. Comparison of in vivo and in vitro readings when testing the accuracy of the Root ZX apex locator. J Endod 2012;38(2):236-239.
25. Gomes S, Oliver R, Macouzet C, Mercadé M, Roig M, Duran-Sindreu F. In vivo evaluation of the Raypex 5 by using different irrigants. J Endod 2012;38(8):1075-1077.
26. Wrbas KT, Ziegler AA, Altenburger MJ, Schirmeister JF. In vivo comparison of working length determination with two electronic apex locators. Int Endod J 2007;40(2):133-138.
27. Gutmann JL, Leonard JE. Problem solving in endodontic working-length determination. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1995;16(3):288-294.
28. Ounsi HF, Naaman A. In vitro evaluation of the reliability of the Root ZX electronic apex locator. Int Endod J 1999;32(2):120-123.
29. ElAyouti A, Kimionis I, Chu AL, Löst C. Determining the apical terminus of root-end resected teeth using three modern apex locators: a comparative ex vivo study. Int Endod J 2005;38(11):827-833.
30. Wu YN, Shi JN, Huang LZ, Xu YY. Variables affecting electronic root canal measurement. Int Endod J 1992;25(2):88-92.
31. Ricard O, Roux D, Bourdeau L, Woda A. Clinical evaluation of the accuracy of the Evident RCM Mark II Apex Locator. J Endod 1991;17(11):567-569.
32. Welk AR, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. An in vivo comparison of two frequency-based electronic apex locators. J Endod 2003;29(8):497-500.
33. Swapna DV, Krishna A, Patil AC, Rashmi K, Pai VS, Ranjini MA. Comparison of third generation versus fourth generation electronic apex locators in detecting apical constriction: An in vivo study. J Conserv Dent 2015; 18: 288-91.
34. Singh D, Tyagi SP, Gupta S, Jain A. Comparative evaluation of adequacy of final working length after using Raypex 5 or radiography: an in vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2015;33(3):208-212.
35. Altunbas D, Kustarci A, Arslan D, Er K. In vitro comparison of four different electronic apex locators to determine the major foramen using clearing technique. Niger J Clin Pract 2014;17(6):706-710.
36. Somma F, Castagnola R, Lajolo C, PaternòHoltzman L, Marigo L. In vivo accuracy of three electronic root canal length measurement devices: Dentaport ZX, Raypex 5 and ProPex II. Int Endod J 2012;45(6):552-556.
37. Aydın U, Karataslioglu E, Aksoy F, Yildirim C. In vitro evaluation of Root ZX and Raypex 6 in teeth with different apical diameters. J Conserv Dent 2015;18(1):66-69.
38. Moscoso S, Pineda K, Basilio J, Alvarado C, Roig M, Duran-Sindreu F. Evaluation of Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 electronic apex locators: an in vitro study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2014;1(19):e202-e205.
39. Vasconcelos BC, BuenoMde M, Luna-Cruz SM, Duarte MA, Fernandes CA. Accuracy of five electronic foramen locators with different operating systems. J Appl Oral Sci 2013;21(2):132-137.
40. Duran-Sindreu F, Gomes S, Stöber E, Mercadé M, Jané L, Roig M. In vivo evaluation of the iPex and Root ZX electronic apex locators using various irrigants. Int Endod J 2013; 46: 769-74.
41. Stein TJ, Corcoran JF, Zillich RM. Influence of the major and minor foramen diameters on apical electronic probe measurements. J Endod 1990;16(11):520-522.