Comparison of the reliability of "0.5" and "APEX" mark measurements in two frequency-based electronic apex locators
- PMID: 21146076
- DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2010.08.048
Comparison of the reliability of "0.5" and "APEX" mark measurements in two frequency-based electronic apex locators
Abstract
Introduction: A measuring instrument must be both accurate and reliable. This study compared the reliability of the "0.5" and "APEX" mark measurements by using 2 impedance quotient-based electronic apex locators (EALs).
Methods: One hundred four extracted human premolars were used in this study. After access preparation, the teeth were embedded in an alginate model. By using 2 EALs (Root ZX and i-Root), the tooth length was measured at the "0.5" and "APEX" marks with K-files. The file was then cemented, and the apical 3-4 mm was trimmed for the photograph under an operating microscope. The distance between the tip of the file and major foramen (MF) was measured. The intraclass correlation coefficient, the Bland-Altman plot, and box plot were used to compare the reliability.
Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.976-0.994, indicating excellent agreement in both "0.5" and "APEX" marks. The Bland-Altman plots showed that the limits of agreement (mean ± 2 standard deviations) were small enough to confirm that both marks of the 2 EALs can be used for clinical purposes. The distribution of the measurements and outliers was analyzed by using box plots, and it was found that there was no significant difference between the 2 marks.
Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the reliability of the "0.5" and "APEX" marks for locating the MF in both devices. Accordingly, knowing where each mark indicates is more important for determining the working length than which mark to choose.
Copyright © 2011 American Association of Endodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Electronic apex locators.Int Endod J. 2005 Jun;38(6):417-8; author reply 418. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2005.00965_1.x. Int Endod J. 2005. PMID: 15910478 No abstract available.
-
Electronic apex locators.Int Endod J. 2004 Jul;37(7):425-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00835.x. Int Endod J. 2004. PMID: 15189431 Review.
-
A comparison between two electronic apex locators: an in vivo investigation.Int Endod J. 2005 Jan;38(1):36-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00899.x. Int Endod J. 2005. PMID: 15606822
-
An in vivo comparison of two frequency-based electronic apex locators.J Endod. 2003 Aug;29(8):497-500. doi: 10.1097/00004770-200308000-00002. J Endod. 2003. PMID: 12929694 Clinical Trial.
-
Electronic apex locator.Dent Clin North Am. 2004 Jan;48(1):35-54. doi: 10.1016/j.cden.2003.10.005. Dent Clin North Am. 2004. PMID: 15066506 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparison Between the Accuracy of NovApex Apex Locator and Radiographs in Determining Radiographic Apex.Iran Endod J. 2011 Spring;6(2):65-8. Epub 2011 May 15. Iran Endod J. 2011. PMID: 23130055 Free PMC article.
-
Accuracy and stability of electronic apex locator length measurements in root canals with wide apical foramen: an ex vivo study.BDJ Open. 2020 Nov 17;6(1):22. doi: 10.1038/s41405-020-00052-3. BDJ Open. 2020. PMID: 33298851 Free PMC article.
-
Factors influencing the accuracy of electronic apex locators: A scoping review.Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2025 Jun 27;22:26. doi: 10.4103/drj.drj_634_23. eCollection 2025. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2025. PMID: 40655901 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Accuracy of five electronic foramen locators with different operating systems: an ex vivo study.J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Mar-Apr;21(2):132-7. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757201302188. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013. PMID: 23739852 Free PMC article.
-
An in vitro evaluation of the accuracy of four electronic apex locators using stainless-steel and nickel-titanium hand files.Restor Dent Endod. 2016 Feb;41(1):6-11. doi: 10.5395/rde.2016.41.1.6. Epub 2016 Jan 4. Restor Dent Endod. 2016. PMID: 26877985 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous