In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of ProPex II, Raypex 6 and iPex II electronic apex locators in primary molar teeth

L. Demiriz, M. Koçak, B. Sağlam, S. Kocak
{"title":"In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of ProPex II, Raypex 6 and iPex II electronic apex locators in primary molar teeth","authors":"L. Demiriz, M. Koçak, B. Sağlam, S. Kocak","doi":"10.4103/2394-2010.184227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Electronic apex locators (EALs) have become popular to measure the working length in permanent teeth in recent years, and they have helped for estimation of the working length more accurate. Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of ProPex II, Raypex 6 and iPex II EALs in primary molar teeth. Materials and Methods: Fifteen mandibular primary second molar teeth with 48 root canals were measured by all EALs. The direct length (DL) of the root canals was measured visually. The differences between DL and electronic working length (EWL) measurements of each device were calculated. Statistically analysis was performed using Student′s t-test, and the significance level was at 5%. Results: For the measurements of ProPex II, the reliability of ±0.5 mm was determined in 77% of all root canals. For Raypex 6, the same result (77%) was observed when the accuracy was also accepted as ±0.5 mm. On the other hand, the result was found as 79% in the measurements of iPex II when the same accuracy limit (±0.5 mm) was considered. When the accuracy limit was ±1 mm, the determined values were 96% for ProPex II and Raypex 6 and 94% for iPex II. There was no significant difference between each EAL group (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The ProPex II, Raypex 6, and iPex II EALs showed similar results and all tested EALs were able to determine the working length in primary molar teeth accurately.","PeriodicalId":16068,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Research and Reviews","volume":"157 1","pages":"37 - 40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/2394-2010.184227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Electronic apex locators (EALs) have become popular to measure the working length in permanent teeth in recent years, and they have helped for estimation of the working length more accurate. Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of ProPex II, Raypex 6 and iPex II EALs in primary molar teeth. Materials and Methods: Fifteen mandibular primary second molar teeth with 48 root canals were measured by all EALs. The direct length (DL) of the root canals was measured visually. The differences between DL and electronic working length (EWL) measurements of each device were calculated. Statistically analysis was performed using Student′s t-test, and the significance level was at 5%. Results: For the measurements of ProPex II, the reliability of ±0.5 mm was determined in 77% of all root canals. For Raypex 6, the same result (77%) was observed when the accuracy was also accepted as ±0.5 mm. On the other hand, the result was found as 79% in the measurements of iPex II when the same accuracy limit (±0.5 mm) was considered. When the accuracy limit was ±1 mm, the determined values were 96% for ProPex II and Raypex 6 and 94% for iPex II. There was no significant difference between each EAL group (P > 0.05). Conclusion: The ProPex II, Raypex 6, and iPex II EALs showed similar results and all tested EALs were able to determine the working length in primary molar teeth accurately.
ProPexⅱ、Raypex 6、iPexⅱ电子牙尖定位器在初级磨牙中准确性的体外评价
背景:近年来,电子牙尖定位仪(EALs)被广泛应用于恒牙工作长度的测量,它有助于更准确地估计恒牙的工作长度。目的:评价ProPex II、Raypex 6和iPex II型EALs在初级磨牙上的准确性。材料与方法:15颗下颌第一第二磨牙,48根根管,全部用EALs测量。目测根管直接长度(DL)。计算了每个装置的DL和电子工作长度(EWL)测量值之间的差异。统计学分析采用Student’st检验,显著性水平为5%。结果:对于ProPex II的测量,在77%的根管中确定了±0.5 mm的可靠性。对于Raypex 6,当精度也接受为±0.5 mm时,观察到相同的结果(77%)。另一方面,当考虑相同的精度极限(±0.5 mm)时,iPex II的测量结果为79%。当精度限为±1 mm时,ProPex II和Raypex 6的测定值为96%,iPex II的测定值为94%。各组间差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。结论:ProPex II、Raypex 6、iPex II EALs检测结果相似,均能准确测定乳牙的工作长度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信