Comparison of root canal length measurement methods in primary teeth
Keywords:apex locator, conventional radiography, RVG, SEM, working length
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of conventional radiography, intraoral digital radiovisiography and electronic apex locator in determining the working length of root canals in primary teeth (in-vivo) and to compare the results with scanning electron microscopy measurements (ex-vivo). Materials and Methods: This study was conducted on 50 primary molar teeth. Standard endodontic access cavity preparations were prepared and the actual length was calculated by calibrated investigators. Working lengths were determined by using conventional radiography, RVG and apex locator in a total of 116 root canals. After the extraction of the teeth, each canal length was determined by using SEM. Data were analysed statistically by using Oneway Anova, Tukey HDS, Student t test and Bonferroni tests. Results: The mean root length measurements with conventional radiography were significantly higher than apex locator, RVG and SEM. The accuracy of apex locator and RVG were higher than conventional radiography in determining the working length in primary teeth. Conclusions: The electronic apex locators provide an acceptable level of accuracy in determining root canal length in primary teeth. Clinical Relevance: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of conventional radiography, intraoral digital radiovisiography and electronic apex locator in determining the working length of root canals in primary teeth and,to compare the results with scanning electron microscopy measurements.
American Academy of Pe-diatric Dentistry Clinical Af-fairs Committee--Pulp Therapy Subcommit-tee; American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry Council on Clinical Affairs (2008-2009) Guideline on Pulp Therapy for Primary and Immature Permanent Teeth. Pediatr Dent 30(7):170-4.
Rodd HD, Waterhouse PJ, Fuks AB, Fayle SA, Moffat MA; British So-ciety of Paediatric Dentis-try (2006) Pulp therapy for primary molars. Int J Pae-diatr Dent 16(1):15-23.
Carotte P (2005) Endodon-tic Treatment for Children. British Dental Journal 198(1):9-15.
Bahrololoomil Z, Soleymani AA, Modaresi J, Imanian M, Lotfian M (2015) Accuracy of an electronic apex loca-tor for working length de-termination in primary an-terior teeth. Jornal of Den-tistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences 12(4):243-8.
Oznurhan F, Unal M, Kapdan A, Ozturk C, Aksoy S (2015) Clinical evaluation of apex locator and radiog-raphy in primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 25:199-203.
Jerrel RG, Ronk SL (1982) Develeopmental arrest of succedaneous tooth fol-lowing pulpectomy in a primary tooth. J Pedod 6(4):337-42.
Ahmed HMA (2013) Ana-tomical challenges, elec-tronic working length de-termination and current developments in root canal preparation of primary mo-lar teeth. Int Endod J 46:1011-1022.
Chawla HS, Setia S, Gupta N, Gauba K, Goyal A (2008) Evaluation of a mixture of zinc oxide, calcium hydrox-ide, and sodium fluoride as a new root canal filling ma-terial for primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 26(2):53-8.
Ricucci D, Langeland K (1998) Apical limit of root canal instrumentation and obturation, part 2. A histo-logical study. Int Endod J 31:394–409.
Burch JG, Hulen S (1972) The relationship of the api-cal foramen to the anatom-ic apex of the tooth root. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 34:262–268.
Kuttler Y (1958) A precision and biologic root canal fill-ing technic. J Am Dent As-soc 56: 38–50.
Katz A, Tamse A, Kaufman AY (1991) Tooth length de-termination: a review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 72:238–242.
Morfis A, Sylaras SN, Geor-gopoulou M, Kernani M, Prountzos F (1994) Study of the apices of human permanent teeth with the use of a scanning electron microscope. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 77:172–176.
Stein TJ, Corcoran JF (1992) Radiographic ‘working length’ revisited. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 74:796–800.
Orosco FA, Bernardineli N, Garcia RB, Bramante CM, Duarte MAH, Moraes IG (2012) In vivo accuracy of conventional and digital radiographic methods in confirming root canal working length determina-tion by Root ZX. J Appl Oral Sci 20(5):522-525.
Ellingsen MA, Hollender LG, Harrington GW (1995) Radiovisiography versus conventional radiography for detection of small in-struments in endodontic length determination. II. In vivo evaluation. J Endod 21(10):516-20.
Shearer AC, Horner K, Wil-son NH (1990) Radiovisiography for imaging root canals: an in vitro comparison with conventional radiog-raphy. Quintessence Int 21(10):789-94.
Kobayashi C. Electronic ca-nal length measurement (1995) Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol En-dod 79:226–231.
Alves AM, Felippe MC, Fe-lippe WT, Rocha MJ (2005) Ex vivo evaluation of the capacity of the Tri Auto ZX to locate the apical fora-men during root canal re-treatment. Int Endod J 38:718–724.
Ebrahim AK, Wadachgi R, Suda H (2007) Electronic apex locators-review. J Med Dent Sci 54:125–136.
Goldberg F, Marroquin BB, Frajlich S, Dreyer C (2005) In vitro evaluation of the ability of three apex loca-tors to determine the working length during re-treatment. J Endod 31:676–678.
Neena IE, Ananthraj A, Praveen P, Karthik V, Rani P (2011) Comparison of digital radiography and apex locator with the con-ventional method in root length determination of primary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 29(4):300-304.
Krishnan IS, Sreedharan S (2012) A comparative eval-uation of electronic and radiographic determination of root canal length in pri-mary teeth: An in vitro study. Contemporary Clini-cal Dentistry 3(4):416-420.
Subramaniam P, Konde S, Mandanna DK (2005). An in vitro comparison of root canal measurement in pri-mary teeth. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 23(3):124-125.
Mello-Moura ACV, Moura-Netto C, Araki AT, Guedes- Pinto AC, Mendes FM (2010) Ex vivo performance of five methods for root canal length determination in primary anterior teeth. Int Endod J 43:142–147.
Mente J, Seidel J, Buchalla W, Koch MJ (2002) Elec-tronic determination of root canal length in prima-ry teeth with and without root resorption. Int Endod J 35:447–452.
Bodur H, Odabaş M, Tulu-noglu O, Tinaz AC (2008). Accuracy of two different apex locators in primary teeth with and without root resorption. Clin Oral Invest 12:137-141.
Angwaravong O, Panitvisai P (2009) Accuracy of an electronic apex locator in primary teeth with root re-sorption. Int Endod J 42:115-121.
Beltrame APCA, Triches TC, Sartori N, Bolan M (2011) Electronic determination of root canal working length in primary molar teeth: an in vivo and ex vivo study. Int Endod J 44:402–406.
Leonardo MR, Silva LAB, Nelson-Filho P, Silva RAB, Raffaini MSGG (2008) Ex vivo evaluation of the ac-curacy of two electronic apex locators during root canal length determination in primary teeth. Int Endod J 41:317–321.
Esmaeili F, Akbari FA, Zarandi A (2016) Compari-son of accuracy of digital and conventional radiog-raphies in determining en-dodontic working length. SADJ 71(9): 395-397.
Mittal R, Singla MG, Sood A, Singla A (2015) Compar-ative evaluation of working length determination by using conventional radiog-raphy, digital radiography and electronic apex loca-tor. Journal of Restorative Dentistry 3(3):70-75.
Diwanji A, Rathore AS, Aro-ra R, Dhar V, Madhusudan A, Doshi J (2014) Working length determination of root canal of young per-manent tooth: An invitro study. Annals of Medical and Health Sciences Re-search 4(4):554-558
Mittal P, Jadhav GR, Logani A (2016) Accuracy of dif-ferent methods to deter-mine working length in teeth with open apex-an ex vivo comparative study. J Dent Specialities 4(1):39-45.
Martins JNR, Marques M, Mata A, Carames J (2014) Clinical efficacy of electron-ic apex locators: Systematic review. J Endod 40(6):759–77.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
- Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
- The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
- Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
- The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
- Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
- The Author represents and warrants that:
- the Work is the Author’s original work;
- the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
- the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
- the Work has not previously been published;
- the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
- the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
- The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.