Comparison of tentative radiographic working length with and without grid versus electronic apex locator

Rambabu, Tanikonda; Srikanth, Visinigiri; Sajjan, Girija S; Ganguru, Sirisha; Gayatri, Chava; Roja, K

doi:10.4103/ccd.ccd_790_17

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…• CT measurement using digital radiography and the Root ZX LEA proved to be a better tool than conventional radiography associated with the same LEA in an in vitro study (Rambabu et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…After thoroughly reading and analysing each article, 15 articles were excluded because their study objective was methods other than periapical radiography (conventional or digital) and LEAs, leaving 11 articles for inclusion in this systematic review (Chaudhary et al, 2018;Keratiotis et al, 2019;Khandewal et al, 2015;Khursheed et al, 2014;Mahmoud et al, 2021;Pishipati, 2013;Raghu et al, 2014;Rambabu et al, 2018;Ramezani et al, 2022;Shah et al, 2013;Tampelini et al, 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Após a leitura completa e análise minuciosa de cada artigo, 15 artigos foram excluídos pois tinham como objetivo de estudo métodos que não a radiografia periapical (convencional ou digital) e LEAs, restando assim 11 artigos para inclusão na presente revisão sistemática (Chaudhary et al, 2018;Keratiotis et al, 2019;Khandewal et al, 2015;Khursheed et al, 2014;Mahmoud et al, 2021;Pishipati, 2013;Raghu et al, 2014;Rambabu et al, 2018;Ramezani et al, 2022;Shah et al, 2013;Tampelini et al, 2017).…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…• Of the studies evaluated, the aim of which was to compare the accuracy of the radiographic method and the electronic method in determining the TC, the majority showed no statistically significant difference in the results obtained between the two methods (Chaudhary et al, 2018;Keratiotis et al, 2019;Khandewal et al, 2015;Khursheed et al, 2014;Raghu et al, 2014;Rambabu et al, 2018). However, more studies show that the electronic method is more accurate than the radiographic method (Mahmoud et al, 2021;Pishipati, 2013;Ramezani et al, 2022;Shah et al, 2013;Tampelini et al, 2017) as shown in Table 2.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• A medição do CT utilizando radiografia digital e o LEA Root ZX mostrou-se uma ferramenta melhor que a radiografia convencional associada ao mesmo LEA, num estudo in vitro (Rambabu et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

See 4 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of the electronic method versus the radiographic method in determining working length: integrative systematic review

Marques,

Delphim,

Fidalgo-Pereira

et al. 2023

RevSALUS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The radiographic method is widely used to calculate the working length (CT). However, it presents limitations that, to overcome them, apical electronic locators (LEAs) were developed to allow greater accuracy and reliability in determining the CT. Objective: The present study aims to perform an integrative systematic review and gather the available scientific evidence on the method that allows greater accuracy in determining the CT between the radiographic method and the electronic localisation method (LEA). Materials and Methods: The literature search was performed on the PubMed platform using keywords combined through the Boolean operator AND as follows: ("endodontics" AND "electronic apex locator" AND "radiographic measurement") and ("endodontics" AND "electronic apex locator" AND "radiographic measurement" AND "odontometry"). Results: 68 articles reporting comparative studies performed between the methods, radiographic and LEA, were identified. Eleven studies were included, of which, in some cases, LEAs showed better results than non-digital periapical radiographs. The studies indicate that although there are differences between the two methods, with greater accuracy in determining LEA, the differences did not prove to be statistically significant. In the presence of irrigating solutions, sodium hypochlorite revealed more significant discrepancies in CT determination with the LEA method. Conclusion: The two methods, radiographic and LEA, should be used in association since each has particularities that present more significant benefits enhancing the success of endodontic treatment and a better and more complete treatment for patients.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsunclassified

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsunclassified

See 3 more Smart Citations

Accuracy of the electronic method versus the radiographic method in determining working length: integrative systematic review

Marques,

Delphim,

Fidalgo-Pereira

et al. 2023

RevSALUS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Advances in Working Length Determination

Nekoofar¹

2022

Endodontic Advances and Evidence‐Based Clinical Guidelines

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of Working Length Determination in Mandibular Single-Rooted Teeth

Sana¹,

Rehman

Javaid

2021

J Gandhara Med Dent Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare working length calculated with conventional radiographs and an electronic apex locator (IPEX II) during the root canal treatment of mandibular anterior teeth. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study was done in the Department of Operative Dentistry, Sardar Begum Dental Hospital, Peshawar during February and March 2018. A consecutive sampling technique was used for sampling. Only 30 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria of our study. Detailed medical and dental history was taken. Only patient fulfilling inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20. RESULTS: The mean age for patients was 45.33±5.16. 33% out of 30 patients (10) were male and 20 were females. The mean working length calculated from radiographs was 22.25±1.29 (min 20.09-max 24.10). The mean working length calculated by the electronic apex locator (IPEX II) was 22.17±1.28 (min 20.00-max 24.07). The mean difference between working length calculated by radiograph and electronic apex locator was -0.084mm, which means the working length determined by radiographs and by electronic apex locator has no difference in mandibular anterior teeth with single canals. CONCLUSION: Both the methods can be used effectively in endodontics for single-rooted mandibular teeth, but if both are used in combinations can lead to an improvement in the working length accuracy, which may significantly reduce the number of radiographs exposure, and increase the success and comfort for endodontic patients. KEYWORDS: Working Length, Apex Locator, Conventional Radiograph

show abstract

Comparison of tentative radiographic working length with and without grid versus electronic apex locator

Cited by 6 publications

References 18 publications

Accuracy of the electronic method versus the radiographic method in determining working length: integrative systematic review

Accuracy of the electronic method versus the radiographic method in determining working length: integrative systematic review

Advances in Working Length Determination

Comparison of Working Length Determination in Mandibular Single-Rooted Teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About