An in vitro evaluation of the accuracy of Dentaport ZX apex locator in enlarged root canals
Article first published online: 12 MAR 2008
Australian Dental Journal
Volume 52, Issue 3, pages 193–197, September 2007
How to Cite
Ebrahim, A., Wadachi, R. and Suda, H. (2007), An in vitro evaluation of the accuracy of Dentaport ZX apex locator in enlarged root canals. Australian Dental Journal, 52: 193–197. doi: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2007.tb00488.x
- Issue published online: 12 MAR 2008
- Article first published online: 12 MAR 2008
- Accepted for publication 24 October 2006.
- Electronic apex locator;
- file size;
- root length determination;
- root canal preparation
Background: The aim of this study was to examine the effects of root canal irrigants on the accuracy of Dentaport ZX™® electronic apex locator (EAL) in enlarged root canals. Our previous study revealed that as the diameter of the root canal increased, the electronically measured length with small size files became shorter in the presence of blood. It is not known whether different canal irrigants would interfere with the reading accuracy of an EAL in enlarged root canals.
Methods: A total of 45 extracted single-rooted human teeth were used. In Stage 1, canals were instrumented using #10–40 K-files with a #40 K-file as the master apical file (MAF). The teeth were randomly divided into five groups and mounted in an experimental apparatus. The following irrigants were used during electronic canal measurements: Group A = 0.5% NaOCl; Group B = 2.5% NaOCl; Group C = 15% EDTA; Group D = 0.8% chlorhexidine (CHX); and Group E = RC Prep. In Stage 2, the canals were enlarged using a #60 K-file as the MAF. In Stages 1 and 2, the apical portion of the canals was instrumented using the step-back sequence (up to a #80 K-file). In Stage 3, the canals were enlarged again using a #80 K-file as the MAF. In each stage, the canal length was measured with a Dentaport ZX™® using #10 and #40, #10 and #60, and #10 and #80 K-files for Stages 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Data were analysed by two-way ANOVA and Fisher's PLSD test.
Results: Statistical analysis showed significant differences among all groups (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between Group A and B at each stage and between Group D and E at Stage 2. A statistical significant difference was observed between #10 K-file and other files (#40, #60 and #80) at each stage (p < 0.01). In Groups A and B, there was no significant difference between #10 and 40 K-files (Stage 1) and between #10 and #60 K- files (Stage 2).
Conclusion: The Dentaport ZX™® was accurate and not adversely affected by the presence of 0.5% or 2.5% NaOCl and EDTA in the enlarged canals, and the measured lengths obtained with small and large size files were comparable. However, it was accurate in the presence of CHX and RC Prep only when large size files were used, and the length measured with small size files was greater than the actual length.