Evaluation of the accuracy of different apex locators in determining the working length during root canal retreatment.

Pelin Tufenkci,Aylin Kalaycı

doi:10.34172/joddd.2020.026

Abstract

Background. This study aimed to assess the accuracy of three electronic apex locators (EALs) (Dentaport ZX [J Morita, Tokyo, Japan], Propex Pixi [Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland], and iPex II [NSK, Tokyo, Japan]) during root canal retreatment. Methods. The root canal lengths of 90 extracted single-rooted human teeth were determined under a dental operating microscope at ×10 magnification. The actual working length (AWL) was 0.5 mm less than the root length. Electronic measurements were performed with the three EALs. The root canals were instrumented and filled to the actual working length using the lateral compaction technique. After seven days, the teeth were retreated until the retreatment file was applied to the root canal at the working length determined by EALs, and then, the three EALs were used for determining the retreatment working length. Data were analyzed using chi-squared and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Results. In the retreatment, the accuracy of EALs was reported at %83.3 for Dentaport ZX, %83.4 forPropex Pixi, and %80 for iPex II within a tolerance of 0.5± mm of the AWL. Conclusion. Under the limitations of this study, Dentaport ZX, Propex Pixi, and iPex II can be a useful adjunct during retreatment. Clinicians should be aware that residual materials in the root canal during retreatment can affect the accuracy of EALs.

Highlights

Recurrent infection or re-infection of endodontically treated teeth might require additional treatment procedures
The accuracy of electronic apex locators (EALs) was 83.3% for Dentaport ZX, 83.4% for Propex Pixi, and 80% for iPex II within a tolerance of ±0.5 mm of the actual working length (AWL), with 86.6% for Dentaport ZX, 93.4% for Propex Pixi and 90% for iPex II within a tolerance of ±1 mm of the AWL
Brunton et al[15] reported that too many radiographic images are taken during the root canal retreatment, that the use of radiography solely would be insufficient in determining the working length, and that the patient would be exposed to excessive radiation

Summary

Introduction

Recurrent infection or re-infection of endodontically treated teeth might require additional treatment procedures. The periradicular tissues can be healed by sufficiently enlarging and disinfecting at the accurately determined root canal length.[3] Bergenholtz et al[4] reported that only 36% of the teeth with over-filled root canals are treated successfully. They observed that the root canal treatment’s success increased up to 62% when the working length was accurately determined during the retreatment

Objectives

Methods

Discussion

Conclusion