Show simple item record

Effectiveness of three electronic apex locators to determine root canal working length.

Efectividad de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos para determinar la longitud radicular de trabajo.

dc.creatorCampillo-Cortes, Carolina
dc.creatorFlores-Reyes, Héctor
dc.creatorDávila-Pérez, Claudia
dc.creatorSilva-Herzog, Daniel
dc.creatorMéndez-González, Verónica
dc.creatorPozos-Guillén, Amaury
dc.date2015-06-05
dc.identifierhttp://www.joralres.com/index.php/JOR/article/view/joralres.2015.049
dc.identifier10.17126/joralres.2015.049
dc.descriptionThe aim of this study was to evaluate in vivo the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) in determining working length (WL) using hand files and a wear technique. Thirty two premolars that were completely formed apically and that were scheduled for extraction for orthodontic reasons from patients between ages of 15 and 20 years old were included. Electronic measurement of WL was performed using the EAL according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The following three EAL were used: A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, and C. Propex II. There were significant difference (p = 0,0002) when comparing median differences among the three EAL. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 and Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), while between Raypex 5 and Propex II, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to the accuracy of the EAL in determining WL (p = 0,1087). The present findings suggest that Root ZX II presented the highest agreement rate for determining the final WL.en-US
dc.descriptionEl objetivo del presente estudio fue evaluar in vivo la exactitud de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos (LAEs) para determinar la longitud de trabajo (LT) usando instrumentos manuales y una técnica de desgaste. Treinta y dos premolares con formación apical completa e indicados para extracción por razones ortodóncicas de pacientes de edad entre 15 y 20 años fueron incluidos en el estudio. Se usaron tres LAE; A. Root ZX II; B. Raypex 5, y C. Propex II. Se encontraron diferencias significativas (p = 0,0002) cuando se compararon las medianas entre los tres LAE. El análisis mostró diferencias entre Root ZX II vs. Raypex 5 y Root ZX II vs. Propex II (p = 0,0044; p = 0,0002), mientras que entre Raypex 5 y Propex II, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la determinación de la LT (p = 0,1087). Los presentes hallazgos sugieren que Root ZX II mostró la mayor exactitud para determinar la LT final.es-ES
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherFacultad de Odontología, Universidad de Concepción, Chile.en-US
dc.relationhttp://www.joralres.com/index.php/JOR/article/view/joralres.2015.049/161
dc.sourceJournal of Oral Research; Vol 4 No 4; 249-254es-ES
dc.sourceJournal of Oral Research; Vol 4 No 4; 249-254en-US
dc.source0719-2479
dc.source0719-2460
dc.subjectElectronic apex locator; working length; major foramen; minor foramen; Raypex 5; Root ZX II; Propex II.en-US
dc.subjectLocalizador apical electrónico; longitud de trabajo; foramen mayor; foramen menor; Raypex 5; Root ZX II; Propex II.es-ES
dc.titleEffectiveness of three electronic apex locators to determine root canal working length.en-US
dc.titleEfectividad de tres localizadores apicales electrónicos para determinar la longitud radicular de trabajo.es-ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.typeArticlesen-US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record