Accuracy of the integrated electronic apex locator in locating simulated perforation under various irrigating solutions in an in vitro study

Abstract

Aim

This study’s objective was to assess the accuracy of the integrated apex locator in identifying artificial root canal perforations in the presence of saline, chlorhexidine, sodium hypochlorite, QMix, and MTAD.

Methods

The root canals of 60 single-rooted extracted human teeth were perforated artificially at a point 10 mm away from the root apex. After measuring the actual lengths up to the perforation point, the teeth were then put within an alginate mould for measurements using an integrated apex locator. Using a #20 K-file in the presence of NaCl, CHX, MTAD, NaOCl, and QMix, an electronic apex locator was used to measure the perforations electronically in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. Between the measurements, each canal was dried with paper points after being irrigated with distilled water. The accuracy of all the readings was calculated at ± 0.5 mm. Statistical analyses were performed using the Z-test.

Results

In comparison to the MTAD, NaOCl, and Qmix, saline and chlorhexidine scored more readings in the ± 0.5 mm range of the perforation site, and the difference was statistically significant.

Conclusion

The most precise electronic measurements of artificial perforation were obtained in the presence of chlorhexidine or saline.

Keywords
Endodontics; MTAD (intracanal irrigant; QMix root canal irrigant; Sodium hypochlorite; Tooth apex

Introduction

Since root canal perforation causes a new artificial route to emerge between the root canal and periodontal tissues, it is an unfavourable condition for clinicians. Iatrogenic perforations or those brought on by the resorptive process are more common. The size and location of the hole, its timing, whether it can be repaired, and how well the perforation material is placed all affect the perforated tooth’s prognosis¹. Therefore, early detection of root perforation and prompt management are essential components for a successful treatment outcome².

The presence of root perforation must be determined since root canal filling materials and irrigating solutions may leak and harm periradicular tissues³. Because of its wide range of antibacterial properties and capacity to break down organic tissue, sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) is advised as the primary irrigant in root canal therapy³. However, a significant problem could be its cytotoxic impact on periapical tissues⁴. Another irrigation solution, chlorhexidine (CHX) (Werax, Tunadent, Izmir, Turkey), due to its biocompatibility and antibacterial properties, is mostly used in patients who are allergic to NaOCl and in teeth with open apices⁵,⁶. The presence of the smear layer impedes the antimicrobial efficacy and intratubular diffusion of NaOCl within the dentinal tubules. To address this challenge, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) has emerged as a preferred final irrigant due to its ability to effectively solubilize and remove the inorganic components of the smear layer and associated debris⁷.

Recent years have seen a rise in mixed irrigation solutions such as MTAD or QMix (Dentsply Tulsa, Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland). The EDTA, CHX, and detergent-based QMix have antibacterial action and are successful in removing the smear layer⁸. Tetracycline, citric acid, and polysorbate 80 detergent are combined to create the MTAD (Dentsply Tulsa, OK, USA) solution used to provide an antibacterial effect during root canal therapy⁹. Multiple in vitro¹⁰,¹¹and vivo¹²,¹³studies have been conducted to evaluate the effects of the irrigants as mentioned above, which are considered very effective disinfectants.

Various methods, including apex locators, radiographic analyses, and the staining of paper points with blood, are employed to identify root perforations¹⁴. Identifying root perforations requires radiographic inspection, yet 2-dimensional radiographic images of a 3-dimensional object typically do not give enough details regarding the perforation site. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) can be used for 3D imaging, however, its usage in vivo perforation identification is constrained by excessive radiation exposure¹⁵. In this regard, it is thought to be more practical and trustworthy to determine root perforation using an electronic apex locator (EAL)¹⁴,¹⁶. The electroconductivity of the irrigant in the root canal, however, has an impact on these devices’ in vivo accuracy¹⁷.

When instrumenting a root canal, concurrently determining the WL is a great boon, integrated apex locators can be used in conjunction with endomotors to do the same¹⁸. One such example is the E-Connect S Endomotor (Eighteeth, Jiangsu Province, Changzhou City, China) coupled with an E-Pex Pro Apex Locator (Eighteeth, Jiangsu Province, Changzhou City, China). For quick and simple root canal preparation, endodontic motors with integrated EALs were created. Along with controlling torque and speed, these hybrid devices make sure to keep an eye on the apical limit while mechanically preparing the canals¹⁹.

Several studies²⁰-²³ have been done on the detection of perforation by electronic apex locators, but to the best of our knowledge, there are no studies that have studied the ability of an integrated apex locator to locate perforation under the influence of various commonly used irrigation solutions. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the same, and to study this phenomenon our study design used artificially created perforations on the tooth to check the accuracy of the integrated apex locator.

Materials and Methods

This study used de-identified samples of human teeth from the Tooth Bank. This study was reviewed and deemed exempt by our institutional ethical committee review board due to the in vitro design of the study. The protocols for the Tooth Bank adhere to our institution’s ethical standards, the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments, as well as any other relevant ethical norms.

60 recently extracted, uncurved, single-rooted human anterior teeth with a single canal were used in the investigation. The sample size calculation was done on power analysis using software G*Power considering the effect size and statistical power. This sample size ensured sufficient sensitivity and struck a balance between statistical significance and practical feasibility.

The teeth that were slated to be removed due to periodontal disease or orthodontic issues were chosen. The teeth were selected through a direct clinical assessment. Exclusion criteria for the study were teeth with caries, fractured or broken teeth, treated teeth, immature apices, root resorption, and multiple canals. The periodontal ligament was removed from the teeth by soaking them in a 0.5% sodium hypochlorite solution for two hours before the test. Using an ultrasonic scaler, all leftover organic residues were eliminated from the external root surfaces. Thereafter, all the teeth were rinsed with distilled water, and then the teeth were transferred to a 0.9% saline solution. Sample preparation and actual length determination were done by one operator, while the determination of length by the integrated apex locator was done by another operator for the teeth.

Sample Preparation

For the study to be carried out effectively, a proper step-by-step chronological order was planned (Figure 1). To begin with, to obtain a consistent reference point for all measurements, all the teeth were decoronated at the cementoenamel junction. Thereafter, access cavity preparation was done in all the decoronated teeth. Following that, each sample was taken up one by one for further preparation. After identifying the root canal orifice, the canal was disinfected and cleaned of debris with 5 ml of 5.25% sodium hypochlorite before evaluating canal patency with a 10 or 15 K-File (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland). Any teeth with canal obstructions were discarded. The pulp tissue was removed with barbed broaches (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) without attempting to enlarge the canal with root canal instruments. To remove the organic contents of the root canal space, the root canals were thoroughly irrigated with 5 ml of sodium hypochlorite.

Figure 1
Flowchart of the experimental design.

An SS white Endoguide EG 8 bur (SS White, New Jersey, US) was used to create the perforation area. All the perforations were prepared on a point on a line marked 10 mm away from the coronal reference point (Figure 2). The first operator placed it perpendicular to the tooth’s long axis of the root in the mid-third of the proximal surface (Figure 3). The perforations were about 0.12 mm in diameter (Figure 4). The perforation area was then checked for standardisation using a digital caliper (Zhart, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India) under a dental operating microscope (DOM) at 16 X magnification (Labomed Prima, LA, USA).

Figure 2
Marking at a 10 mm distance from the coronal reference point.

Figure 3
Perforation preparation.

Figure 4
Measurement of perforation size.

Measurement of length till perforation

Working length determination was done by two different operators to avoid bias. The exact working length was determined by the first operator up until the perforation, while the second operator performed the same task but using an integrated apex locator.

Actual length

Despite knowing the length of perforation, due to the slightest change in the angulation of the drilling bur, the actual length could be different. Therefore, the first operator took an actual length measurement till the upper border of the perforation. Under a DOM, a #20 K-file was used to measure the actual length (AL) till the perforation site to the coronal reference point (Figure 5). After visual confirmation, the file was retracted back to the coronal margin of the perforation hole. This distance was considered the actual length and the digital caliper was used to measure and record this distance, extending from the rubber stop to the file tip.

Figure 5
Actual length determination until perforation.

Length measurement by integrated apex locator

After determining AL, electronic measurements were made per the manufacturer’s guidelines by the second operator (Figure 6). The teeth were embedded in the freshly prepared alginate model with dimensions of 2 x 2 x 1.5 inches. Each group was studied separately. The second operator took measurements of the working length with an integrated apex locator (IAL) after filling the root canal with the chosen irrigant. The root canals were irrigated with 5 ml of distilled water to prevent measurement errors, and they were dried with paper points in between each measurement of a different irrigant. Each tooth’s root canal was filled with the irrigating solution, the surplus was removed from the chamber, and the tooth’s exterior surface and pulp chamber were both dried with a cotton swab.

Figure 6
Determination of length by integrated apex locator.

The auto apical reverse (AAR) feature was kept on before taking all the readings. For the E-Pex Pro Apex Locator, the 16/02 glide path file (Proglider, Dentsply Sirona, California, USA) was slowly and steadily advanced until the LCD displayed the apex signal, and thereafter the file was retracted to the 0.5 mm mark in the green zone. The length was recorded with the help of the digital calliper. After completion of taking readings with each irrigating solution, the alginate model was repoured with freshly mixed alginate, and the whole process was repeated for the next tooth sample.

Statistical Analysis

All the reading data were tabulated according to two different levels of accuracy ranges using Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Office, Washington, USA). Thereafter, the percentage of accuracy was calculated using the formula -

$\frac{\text{Readings in}\pm 0.5mm\text{range}}{\text{Total number of readings}}\%$

The IBM SPSS Statistics software (version 20.0; IBMCorp., Armonk, NY, USA) was used for calculating statistical significance for the readings obtained in the ± 0.5 mm range. Intergroup comparison was done using the Z-test difference between two proportions.

The z-test was employed to validate whether observed differences in accuracies across variables arose from chance or revealed significant, non-random variations. This statistical assessment provided robust evidence, enabling conclusions about the true impact of each variable on accuracy measurements.

Results

The AL and range of working length obtained by IAL till the perforation site under different canal conditions are shown in Table 1. The readings in the range of ± 0.5 mm were considered the most accurate and were used for the calculation of accuracy under different solutions. The most accurate readings were recorded with chlorhexidine and saline, 96.66 % and 93.33 % respectively. (Table 1)

Table 1
Accuracy of perforation detection based on scoring criteria and Intergroup comparison based on the use of various irrigating solutions for determining working length till perforation, using the Z-test.

Accuracy Range	Saline (n=60)	Sodium hypochlorite (n=60)	Qmix (n=60)	Chlorhexidine (n=60)	MTAD (n=60)
±0.5 mm	56	44	46	58	48
> 0.5 mm - ≥1 mm	4	16	14	2	12
Accuracy (%)	93.33	73.33	76.66	96.66	80
Saline	-	0.00328**	0.01046*	0.40090$	0.03156*
Sodium hypochlorite	0.00328**	-	0.67448	0.00034**	0.38978
Qmix	0.01046*	0.67449$	-	0.00128**	0.65994$
Chlorhexidine	0.40090	0.00034**	0.00128**	-	0.00452**
MTAD	0.03156*	0.38978	0.65994	0.00452**	-

• MTAD - Mineral trioxide aggregate and Detergent
• P value: level of significance; $: P value>0.05-Not Significant, *: P value<0.05-Significant, **: P value<0.01-Highly Significant; MTAD - Mineral trioxide aggregate and Detergent

Intergroup comparison showed a highly statistically significant difference (HS) (P < 0.01) between readings obtained under chlorhexidine and all other irrigating solutions except for saline. Statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) were noted for saline and other irrigating media readings, while an HS difference was observed between saline and sodium hypochlorite. (Table 1)

Discussion

Perforations were made in this study with a mean diameter of 0.12 mm to simulate medium defects on the root surface, reflecting clinical conditions such as root surface resorption and perforations caused by coronal shapers or drills used during post-space preparation. The diameter of the perforations in this study was found to be similar to or larger than in the previous studies¹⁶,²⁴,²⁵. In previous studies, perforations of 1, 0.60, 0.40, 0.30, and 0.27 mm were used²⁴,²⁶,²⁷. In one investigation, artificial perforations made using a spherical bur with a diameter of 1 mm were regarded as unrealistic²⁴. Large defects on the root surface, on the other hand, can occur as a result of resorption and the use of coronal shapers or large files, as well as during various intracanal procedures for post placement.

In earlier in vitro studies, the teeth were placed in agar, gelatin, alginate, or floral sponge that had been saturated with NaCl to use an apex locator in perforated teeth. The most precise measurements, according to Baldi et al.²⁸, were made in cases that were immersed in alginate. Alginate replicates the electric impedance of the human periodontium well, making it a suitable medium for creating the requisite electric circuit for an accurate electronic apex locator measurement²⁹.

The accuracy achieved by IAL in our study under the conditions of saline and chlorhexidine was at an acceptable level of 90% (Table 1), which was similar to that of studies conducted by Cimilli et al.³⁰ and Cruz et al.³¹. However, it was not quite the same for other solutions, indicating that the Auto apical reverse (AAR) feature may have been a factor in decreased accuracy in certain conditions³². Most studies used a permissible range of ± 0.5 mm³³,³⁴ to assess the accuracy of the EALs. Others used a ± 1.0 mm error range, which was more forgiving³⁰,³⁵. Therefore, another reason for the significant differences in accuracy under various conditions can be due to the consideration of ± 0.5 mm as the criteria for accuracy.

In this investigation, 2% chlorhexidine provided the greatest number of readings in the ± 0.5 mm range, followed by saline. Overall data showed that normal saline performed similarly well while 3% sodium hypochlorite was the least accurate, and was preceded by Qmix and MTAD.

According to Shin HS et al., the electrical conductivity of tap water ranges from 100 to 1,000 S/cm, whereas that of a 5% sodium chloride solution is 70,000 S/cm. Physiologic saline and 1% NaOCl solution have electrical conductivities of 44,940 S/cm and 172,420 S/cm, respectively²⁴. It was hypothesised that a change in electroconductivity would cause a shift in the frequency quotient curve. When conductive solutions are present inside the canal, the changes in electrical properties as the foramen is approached and passed are negligible. This circumstance would make it more difficult to determine the foramen electrically. In fact, Meredith and Gulabiwala³⁶ found that the series resistance for dry canals (22.19-92.07 k) increased clearly as the distance from the radiographic apex increased, and these values were noticeably higher than those containing deionized water (9.32-12.10 k) and sodium hypochlorite (7.46-8.92 k). It was shown by Ikhar et al.³⁷that the Dentaport ZX and Propex II apex locators provided the least accurate results in the perforated root canal with NaOCl, which was consistent with the findings of our study. In contrast, Duran-Sindreu et al.³⁸reported that the accuracy of either the IPEX or Root Z EAL was not affected by the use of chlorhexidine and sodium hypochlorite.

In this study, as in many others, it was discovered that the irrigants used for the final rinses, such as 3% sodium hypochlorite, Qmix, and MTAD, were not as reliable for carrying out electronic canal measurements. Instead, 2% chlorhexidine, 17% EDTA, and 0.9% saline were found to be more reliable. As with the earlier solutions, there isn’t much clinical data on their effects on measuring working length using an integrated apex locator in perforated root canals because the majority of studies focus on the effects of different irrigating solutions on electronic working length measurements of the entire root length. However, the evidence that is now available points towards the relative electroconductivity of different irrigation solutions and its variable impacts on the estimation of working length by an integrated apex locator.

To mention a few limitations of the studies. A comparative evaluation with other apex locators was avoided to focus on the accuracy of the integrated apex locator. The various sizes of perforation, location of the perforation, size of the file, and various other influencing factors could not be analysed. Nonetheless, additional research can aid in our understanding.

In conclusion, with different degrees of accuracy, the integrated apex locator could determine the working length till perforation under all irrigating solutions.

In comparison to Qmix, MTAD, and sodium hypochlorite, chlorhexidine and saline proved to be better suitable for precise working length assessment in the perforated root canal.

Acknowledgement

None.

References

• ¹
  Saed SM, Ashley MP, Darcey J. Root perforations: aetiology, management strategies and outcomes. The hole truth. Br Dent J. 2016 Feb;220(4):171-80. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.132.
  » https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.132
• ²
  Estrela C, Decurcio DA, Rossi-Fedele G, Silva JA, Guedes OA, Borges ÁH. Root perforations: a review of diagnosis, prognosis and materials. Braz Oral Res. 2018 Oct;32(suppl 1):e73. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0073.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0073
• ³
  Bilaiya S, Patni PM, Jain P, Pandey SH, Raghuwanshi S, Bagulkar B. Comparative evaluation of accuracy of ipex, root zx mini, and epex pro apex locators in teeth with artificially created root perforations in presence of various intracanal irrigants. Eur Endod J. 2020 Mar;5(1):6-9. doi: 10.14744/eej.2019.07279.
  » https://doi.org/10.14744/eej.2019.07279
• ⁴
  Tanomaru Filho M, Leonardo MR, Silva LA, Aníbal FF, Faccioli LH. Inflammatory response to different endodontic irrigating solutions. Int Endod J. 2002 Sep;35(9):735-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00544.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2002.00544.x
• ⁵
  Mohammadi Z, Abbott PV. The properties and applications of chlorhexidine in endodontics. Int Endod J. 2009 Apr;42(4):288-302. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01540.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2008.01540.x
• ⁶
  Mehdipour O, Kleier DJ, Averbach RE. Anatomy of sodium hypochlorite accidents. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007 Oct;28(10):544-6, 548, 550.
• ⁷
  Castagnola R, Martini C, Colangeli M, Pellicciotta I, Marigo L, Grande NM, et al. In vitro evaluation of smear layer and debris removal and antimicrobial activity of different irrigating solutions. Eur Endod J. 2024 Jan;9(1):81-8. doi: 10.14744/eej.2023.19042.
  » https://doi.org/10.14744/eej.2023.19042
• ⁸
  Stojicic S, Shen Y, Qian W, Johnson B, Haapasalo M. Antibacterial and smear layer removal ability of a novel irrigant, QMiX. Int Endod J. 2012 Apr;45(4):363-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01985.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.01985.x
• ⁹
  Johal S, Baumgartner JC, Marshall JG. Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of 1.3% NaOCl/BioPure MTAD to 5.25% NaOCl/15% EDTA for root canal irrigation. J Endod. 2007 Jan;33(1):48-51. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.08.007. Erratum in: J Endod. 2007 Feb;33(2):186.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.08.007
• ¹⁰
  Küçük M, Kermeoglu F. Efficacy of different irrigation methods on dentinal tubule penetration of Chlorhexidine, QMix and Irritrol: A confocal laser scanning microscopy study. Aust Endod J. 2019 Aug;45(2):202-8. doi: 10.1111/aej.12309.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12309
• ¹¹
  Mattigatti S, Ratnakar P, Moturi S, Varma S, Rairam S. Antimicrobial effect of conventional root canal medicaments vs propolis against Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus and Candida albicans. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012 May;13(3):305-9. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1142.
  » https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1142
• ¹²
  Tulsani SG, Chikkanarasaiah N, Bethur S. An in vivo comparison of antimicrobial efficacy of sodium hypochlorite and Biopure MTAD™ against enterococcus faecalis in primary teeth: a qPCR study. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2014 Fall;39(1):30-4. doi: 10.17796/jcpd.39.1.c4q2155r16817219.
  » https://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.39.1.c4q2155r16817219
• ¹³
  Rodríguez-Benítez S, Stambolsky Guelfand C, Martín-Jiménez M, Segura-Egea JJ. Root canal disinfection of immature dog teeth with apical periodontitis: Comparison of three different protocols. J Clin Exp Dent. 2014 Oct;6(4):e357-63. doi: 10.4317/jced.51475.
  » https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.51475
• ¹⁴
  Tsesis I, Blazer T, Ben-Izhack G, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M, Corbella S, et al. The precision of electronic apex locators in working length determination: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Endod. 2015 Nov;41(11):1818-23. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.08.012.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2015.08.012
• ¹⁵
  Mahmoud O, Awad Abdelmagied MH, Dandashi AH, Jasim BN, Tawfik Kayali HA, Al Shehadat S. Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Different Apex Locators: Propex IQ, Raypex 6, Root ZX, and Apex ID with CBCT and Periapical Radiograph-In Vitro Study. Int J Dent. 2021 May;2021:5563426. doi: 10.1155/2021/5563426.
  » https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5563426
• ¹⁶
  Altunbas D, Kustarci A, Toyoglu M. The influence of various irrigants on the accuracy of 2 electronic apex locators in locating simulated root perforations. J Endod. 2017 Mar;43(3):439-42. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.031.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.031
• ¹⁷
  Kang JA, Kim SK. Accuracies of seven different apex locators under various conditions. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2008 Oct;106(4):e57-62. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.04.001.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.04.001
• ¹⁸
  Chukka RR, Bellam MD, Marukala NR, Dinapadu S, Konda NK, Nagilla J. Efficiency of an integrated apex locator in determining working length in various irrigating solutions: an in vivo study. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2020 Aug;12(Suppl 1):S410-S414. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_122_20.
  » https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_122_20
• ¹⁹
  Khan SA, Khanna R, Navit S, Jabeen S, Grover N, Pramanik S. Comparison of radiovisiography, an apex locator and an integrated endomotor-inbuilt apex locator in primary teeth endometrics. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2022;15(Suppl 1):S18-S21. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2123.
  » https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2123
• ²⁰
  Adibi A, Sobhnamayan F, Ostovar Zijerdi N, Tajik M, Paknahad M. Comparison of the accuracy of cbct images and apex locator in detection of external root resorption with perforation. J Dent (Shiraz). 2022 Dec;23(4):445-451. doi: 10.30476/DENTJODS.2021.91056.1548.
  » https://doi.org/10.30476/DENTJODS.2021.91056.1548
• ²¹
  Shekarchizade N, Farhad A, Khalifezade S. The accuracy of three apex locators in determining the location of strip root perforation in different environments. Iran Endod J. 2021 Summer;16(3):184-8. doi: 10.22037/iej.v16i3.32515.
  » https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v16i3.32515
• ²²
  Harorli H, Koç S, Kustarci A. In vitro comparison of the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography scanning and electronic apex locators in detection of simulated root perforations in different localizations. J Endod. 2023 Dec;49(12):1676-81. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2023.09.006.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2023.09.006
• ²³
  Dumani A, Ates AA, Ucan CS, Yilmaz S, Unal I, Yoldas O. The influence of MTAD and QMix on the accuracy of electronic apex locator in locating simulated perforations. Niger J Clin Pract. 2022 Mar;25(3):281-5. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_1444_21.
  » https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_1444_21
• ²⁴
  Shin HS, Yang WK, Kim MR, Ko HJ, Cho KM, Park SH, et al. Accuracy of Root ZX in teeth with simulated root perforation in the presence of gel or liquid type endodontic irrigant. Restor Dent Endod. 2012 Aug;37(3):149-54. doi: 10.5395/rde.2012.37.3.149.
  » https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2012.37.3.149
• ²⁵
  Prasad AB, Harshit S, Aastha SA, Deepak R. An invitro evaluation of the accuracy of two electronic apex locators to determine working length in the presence of various irrigants. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2016 Sep;26(5):457-62. doi: 10.4314/ejhs.v26i5.7.
  » https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v26i5.7
• ²⁶
  Zmener O, Grimberg F, Banegas G, Chiacchio L. Detection and measurement of endodontic root perforations using a newly designed apex-locating handpiece. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1999 Aug;15(4):182-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00798.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1999.tb00798.x
• ²⁷
  Kaufman AY, Fuss Z, Keila S, Waxenberg S. Reliability of different electronic apex locators to detect root perforations in vitro. Int Endod J. 1997 Nov;30(6):403-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.1997.00107.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.1997.00107.x
• ²⁸
  Baldi JV, Victorino FR, Bernardes RA, de Moraes IG, Bramante CM, Garcia RB, et al. Influence of embedding media on the assessment of electronic apex locators. J Endod. 2007 Apr;33(4):476-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.024.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2006.12.024
• ²⁹
  Williams CB, Joyce AP, Roberts S. A comparison between in vivo radiographic working length determination and measurement after extraction. J Endod. 2006 Jul;32(7):624-7. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.044.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2005.10.044
• ³⁰
  Cimilli H, Aydemir S, Arican B, Mumcu G, Chandler N, Kartal N. Accuracy of the Dentaport ZX apex locator for working length determination when retreating molar root canals. Aust Endod J. 2014 Apr;40(1):2-5. doi: 10.1111/aej.12010.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12010
• ³¹
  Cruz ATG, Wichnieski C, Carneiro E, da Silva Neto UX, Gambarini G, Piasecki L. Accuracy of 2 endodontic rotary motors with integrated apex locator. J Endod. 2017 Oct;43(10):1716-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2017.05.012.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.05.012
• ³²
  Siu C, Marshall JG, Baumgartner JC. An in vivo comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by using rotary nickel-titanium files. J Endod. 2009 Jul;35(7):962-5. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025
• ³³
  D'Assunção FL, Sousa JC, Felinto KC, de Medeiros TC, Leite DT, de Lucena RB, et al. Accuracy and repeatability of 3 apex locators in locating root canal perforations: an ex vivo study. J Endod. 2014 Aug;40(8):1241-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.02.004.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.02.004
• ³⁴
  Khandewal D, Ballal NV, Saraswathi MV. Comparative evaluation of accuracy of 2 electronic Apex locators with conventional radiography: an ex vivo study. J Endod. 2015 Feb;41(2):201-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.10.011.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2014.10.011
• ³⁵
  Herrera M, Ábalos C, Lucena C, Jiménez-Planas A, Llamas R. Critical diameter of apical foramen and of file size using the Root ZX apex locator: an in vitro study. J Endod. 2011 Sep;37(9):1306-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.05.007.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.05.007
• ³⁶
  Meredith N, Gulabivala K. Electrical impedance measurements of root canal length. Endod Dent Traumatol. 1997 Jun;13(3):126-31. doi:10.1111/j.1600-9657.1997.tb00025.x.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-9657.1997.tb00025.x
• ³⁷
  Ikhar Y, Gade V, Patil S, Gade J. The influence of various irrigants on the accuracy of third generation apex locator and fifth generation apex locators in locating simulated root perforation: An in vitro study. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2019 Jul;18(7):86-91. doi: 10.9790/0853-1807048691.
  » https://doi.org/10.9790/0853-1807048691
• ³⁸
  Duran-Sindreu F, Gomes S, Stöber E, Mercadé M, Jané L, Roig M. In vivo evaluation of the iPex and Root ZX electronic apex locators using various irrigants. Int Endod J. 2013 Aug;46(8):769-74. doi: 10.1111/iej.12057.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12057

• Data availability
  All the datasets related to this article will be available upon request to the corresponding author.

Edited by

Editor: Dr. Altair A. Del Bel Cury

Data availability

Data availability

All the datasets related to this article will be available upon request to the corresponding author.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  02 Aug 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  09 Sept 2022
• Accepted
  01 Apr 2024