根管锥度对两种不同电子根尖定位仪测量结果的影响。

Q2 Dentistry
Francisco-Nathizael-Ribeiro Gonçalves, Amanda-Brito Santos, Ana-Letícia-Linhares-de Sousa Paula, Nathalia-Aguiar Freitas, Reuton-Dos Santos-Palheta Filho, Fábio-Luiz-Cunha D'Assunção, Luciana-Maria-Arcanjo Frota, George-Táccio-de Miranda Candeiro
{"title":"根管锥度对两种不同电子根尖定位仪测量结果的影响。","authors":"Francisco-Nathizael-Ribeiro Gonçalves, Amanda-Brito Santos, Ana-Letícia-Linhares-de Sousa Paula, Nathalia-Aguiar Freitas, Reuton-Dos Santos-Palheta Filho, Fábio-Luiz-Cunha D'Assunção, Luciana-Maria-Arcanjo Frota, George-Táccio-de Miranda Candeiro","doi":"10.4317/jced.61352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This research aimed to analyze the influence of root canal taper on the accuracy of two Electronic Apex Locators (EALs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Twenty-five disto-vestibular roots from extracted human upper molars belonging to the tooth bank were used in this study. To determine the File Position (FP), access was made using a spherical diamond tip #1014, and the crowns were sectioned using a diamond tip #3080. The initial anatomic file used was a size K #10, which was introduced into the root canal until its tip was visualized (foraminal patency) with the aid of a clinical microscope (16X magnification). Teeth without foraminal patency and calcifications were excluded from the study. Odontometric readings were performed using two different EALs (Root ZX II and Romiapex A-15), considering the electronic reference point 0.0 (apex) for each device. All measurements were taken in triplicate, and the arithmetic mean of the three values was used. Digital calipers were used to record the measurements, which were then entered into an Excel spreadsheet. After visual verification using file K #10, the canals were instrumented with a #25.01 file to standardize the apical region, then successively instrumented with files #25.02, #25.04, #25.06, #25.08, #25.10, and #25.12, with electronic odontometry checked after each instrumentation using #25.02. Measurement 0.0 was adopted, with error margins of ±0.5 and ±1.0. Discrepancies between visual and electronic readings were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni tests, with significance considered when <i>P</i><0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the 0.0 mark and a ±1.0 error margin, it was observed that readings from the devices were similar in canals with different tapers (<i>P</i>>0.05), showing a tendency towards underestimation. However, when using the measurement variation margin of ±0.50, a statistically significant difference was found in the Romiapex A-15 group (<i>P</i>=0.0248) when comparing the results of the two EALs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Therefore, it was concluded that the canal taper did not significantly influence the accuracy of the evaluated EALs, using the reference point 0.0. When using the ±0.5 variation margin, the Romiapex A-15 device showed greater accuracy, and finally, at the ±1.0 error margin, both EALs exhibited excellent precision. <b>Key words:</b>Endodontics, Odontometry, Eletronic Apex Locator, Root Canal Preparation.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"16 6","pages":"e733-e739"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11310975/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of root canal taper on the measurement of two different electronic apex locators.\",\"authors\":\"Francisco-Nathizael-Ribeiro Gonçalves, Amanda-Brito Santos, Ana-Letícia-Linhares-de Sousa Paula, Nathalia-Aguiar Freitas, Reuton-Dos Santos-Palheta Filho, Fábio-Luiz-Cunha D'Assunção, Luciana-Maria-Arcanjo Frota, George-Táccio-de Miranda Candeiro\",\"doi\":\"10.4317/jced.61352\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This research aimed to analyze the influence of root canal taper on the accuracy of two Electronic Apex Locators (EALs).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Twenty-five disto-vestibular roots from extracted human upper molars belonging to the tooth bank were used in this study. To determine the File Position (FP), access was made using a spherical diamond tip #1014, and the crowns were sectioned using a diamond tip #3080. The initial anatomic file used was a size K #10, which was introduced into the root canal until its tip was visualized (foraminal patency) with the aid of a clinical microscope (16X magnification). Teeth without foraminal patency and calcifications were excluded from the study. Odontometric readings were performed using two different EALs (Root ZX II and Romiapex A-15), considering the electronic reference point 0.0 (apex) for each device. All measurements were taken in triplicate, and the arithmetic mean of the three values was used. Digital calipers were used to record the measurements, which were then entered into an Excel spreadsheet. After visual verification using file K #10, the canals were instrumented with a #25.01 file to standardize the apical region, then successively instrumented with files #25.02, #25.04, #25.06, #25.08, #25.10, and #25.12, with electronic odontometry checked after each instrumentation using #25.02. Measurement 0.0 was adopted, with error margins of ±0.5 and ±1.0. Discrepancies between visual and electronic readings were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni tests, with significance considered when <i>P</i><0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using the 0.0 mark and a ±1.0 error margin, it was observed that readings from the devices were similar in canals with different tapers (<i>P</i>>0.05), showing a tendency towards underestimation. However, when using the measurement variation margin of ±0.50, a statistically significant difference was found in the Romiapex A-15 group (<i>P</i>=0.0248) when comparing the results of the two EALs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Therefore, it was concluded that the canal taper did not significantly influence the accuracy of the evaluated EALs, using the reference point 0.0. When using the ±0.5 variation margin, the Romiapex A-15 device showed greater accuracy, and finally, at the ±1.0 error margin, both EALs exhibited excellent precision. <b>Key words:</b>Endodontics, Odontometry, Eletronic Apex Locator, Root Canal Preparation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"16 6\",\"pages\":\"e733-e739\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11310975/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61352\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究旨在分析根管锥度对两种电子根尖定位仪(EAL)精度的影响:本研究旨在分析根管锥度对两种电子根尖定位仪(EAL)准确性的影响:本研究使用了牙库中拔出的 25 颗人类上磨牙的双前庭根。为确定锉位(FP),使用 #1014 号球形金刚石尖进行切取,并使用 #3080 号金刚石尖对牙冠进行切片。最初使用的解剖锉是尺寸为 K #10的锉刀,借助临床显微镜(16 倍放大镜)将其导入根管,直到看到锉尖为止(管腔通畅)。没有根管通畅和钙化的牙齿不在研究范围内。使用两种不同的 EAL(Root ZX II 和 Romiapex A-15)进行齿面测量读数,每种设备的电子参考点均为 0.0(顶点)。所有测量均一式三份,取三个值的算术平均值。使用数字卡尺记录测量值,然后将其输入 Excel 电子表格。使用 K #10 文件进行目视验证后,使用 25.01 号文件对根尖区进行标准化器械检查,然后依次使用 25.02 号、25.04 号、25.06 号、25.08 号、25.10 号和 25.12 号文件进行器械检查,每次器械检查后都使用 25.02 号文件进行电子牙体测量。采用测量值 0.0,误差范围为 ±0.5 和 ±1.0。目测读数和电子读数之间的差异使用方差分析和邦费罗尼检验进行统计分析,并考虑结果的显著性:使用 0.0 刻度和 ±1.0 误差幅度,可以观察到在不同锥度的牙槽中,设备读数相似(P>0.05),显示出低估的趋势。然而,当使用±0.50的测量误差裕度时,在比较两种EAL的结果时,发现Romiapex A-15组的差异具有统计学意义(P=0.0248):因此,得出的结论是,以 0.0 为参考点,牙道锥度对所评估的 EAL 的准确性没有显著影响。当使用±0.5误差幅度时,Romiapex A-15装置显示出更高的精确度,最后,在±1.0误差幅度时,两种EAL都显示出极佳的精确度。关键词:根管治疗、牙体测量、电子根尖定位仪、根管预备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Influence of root canal taper on the measurement of two different electronic apex locators.

Background: This research aimed to analyze the influence of root canal taper on the accuracy of two Electronic Apex Locators (EALs).

Material and methods: Twenty-five disto-vestibular roots from extracted human upper molars belonging to the tooth bank were used in this study. To determine the File Position (FP), access was made using a spherical diamond tip #1014, and the crowns were sectioned using a diamond tip #3080. The initial anatomic file used was a size K #10, which was introduced into the root canal until its tip was visualized (foraminal patency) with the aid of a clinical microscope (16X magnification). Teeth without foraminal patency and calcifications were excluded from the study. Odontometric readings were performed using two different EALs (Root ZX II and Romiapex A-15), considering the electronic reference point 0.0 (apex) for each device. All measurements were taken in triplicate, and the arithmetic mean of the three values was used. Digital calipers were used to record the measurements, which were then entered into an Excel spreadsheet. After visual verification using file K #10, the canals were instrumented with a #25.01 file to standardize the apical region, then successively instrumented with files #25.02, #25.04, #25.06, #25.08, #25.10, and #25.12, with electronic odontometry checked after each instrumentation using #25.02. Measurement 0.0 was adopted, with error margins of ±0.5 and ±1.0. Discrepancies between visual and electronic readings were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and Bonferroni tests, with significance considered when P<0.05.

Results: Using the 0.0 mark and a ±1.0 error margin, it was observed that readings from the devices were similar in canals with different tapers (P>0.05), showing a tendency towards underestimation. However, when using the measurement variation margin of ±0.50, a statistically significant difference was found in the Romiapex A-15 group (P=0.0248) when comparing the results of the two EALs.

Conclusions: Therefore, it was concluded that the canal taper did not significantly influence the accuracy of the evaluated EALs, using the reference point 0.0. When using the ±0.5 variation margin, the Romiapex A-15 device showed greater accuracy, and finally, at the ±1.0 error margin, both EALs exhibited excellent precision. Key words:Endodontics, Odontometry, Eletronic Apex Locator, Root Canal Preparation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery
×
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