An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files

Abstract Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of working length (WL) measurements by using the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator with rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments. Methods Twenty-eight teeth had their WLs determined with each electronic apex l...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of endodontics 2009-07, Vol.35 (7), p.962-965
Hauptverfasser: Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc, Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD, Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 965
container_issue 7
container_start_page 962
container_title Journal of endodontics
container_volume 35
creator Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc
Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD
Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD
description Abstract Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of working length (WL) measurements by using the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator with rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments. Methods Twenty-eight teeth had their WLs determined with each electronic apex locator (EAL) by using 0.04 taper ProFiles sizes 40–20 in a crown-down technique until WL was reached. Four control teeth had their WL determined by using stainless steel hand files. The files were cemented at WL, and the teeth were extracted. The apical 4 mm of each root was shaved to the apical constriction, exposing the file. Photographs were taken under 15× and 30× magnification and projected at 360× and 720× for evaluation. Results The accuracy of the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator in locating the minor diameter within ±0.5 mm was 50%, 46.43%, and 39.29%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the EALs in locating the minor diameter. The determination of WL by using hand files in the control teeth was more accurate. Conclusions The Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator used with rotary NiTi files were able to locate the apical constriction within ±0.5 mm only 50% or less of the time.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67437739</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0099239909003690</els_id><sourcerecordid>67437739</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-cadd1caad630c91e677cdb259793e187adcd963087715ccbaef0e2b4ee964b9f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUGP0zAQhS0EYsvCH-CAfOK0CXacxLWEkKqKLpXKIpVdtOJiOfYEnE3trp1U9N_j0EpIHDhZ43nvaeYbhF5TklNC63dd3nlweUGIyEmZk6J6gmZ0zucZq6ryKZqlhsgKJsQFehFjRwjljPHn6IKKquaMVjN0WDi8dvibPXi89Lu9CjZ6h32Lh5-At94P-Ps9Xq-v_tSLPfzCN9trfL_aXmHlDP5snT19b7xWgw-4OeK7aN2PZB5UOOIbqx-gz27toJwdd3hle4gv0bNW9RFend9LdLf6eLv8lG2-XK-Xi02mSyKGTCtjqFbK1IxoQaHmXJumqAQXDNKmymgjUm_OOa20bhS0BIqmBBB12YiWXaK3p9x98I8jxEHubNTQ98qBH6Oseck4ZyIJi5NQBx9jgFbug92l-SUlcqItOznRlhNtSUqZaCfTm3P62OzA_LWc8SbB-5MA0o4HC0FGbcFpMDaAHqTx9v_5H_6x6z7x1qp_gCPEzo_BJXqSylhIIr9O957OTQQhrBaE_QaMLKSN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67437739</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc ; Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD ; Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc ; Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD ; Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of working length (WL) measurements by using the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator with rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments. Methods Twenty-eight teeth had their WLs determined with each electronic apex locator (EAL) by using 0.04 taper ProFiles sizes 40–20 in a crown-down technique until WL was reached. Four control teeth had their WL determined by using stainless steel hand files. The files were cemented at WL, and the teeth were extracted. The apical 4 mm of each root was shaved to the apical constriction, exposing the file. Photographs were taken under 15× and 30× magnification and projected at 360× and 720× for evaluation. Results The accuracy of the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator in locating the minor diameter within ±0.5 mm was 50%, 46.43%, and 39.29%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the EALs in locating the minor diameter. The determination of WL by using hand files in the control teeth was more accurate. Conclusions The Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator used with rotary NiTi files were able to locate the apical constriction within ±0.5 mm only 50% or less of the time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0099-2399</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-3554</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19567315</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Apex NRG ZFR ; apical constriction ; Dental Alloys ; Dental Instruments ; Dental Pulp Cavity - anatomy &amp; histology ; Dentistry ; Electric Impedance ; Electrical Equipment and Supplies ; electronic apex locator ; Endocrinology &amp; Metabolism ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; Mini Apex Locator ; minor diameter ; Nickel ; Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation ; Root ZX II ; rotary files ; Stainless Steel ; Titanium ; Tooth Apex - anatomy &amp; histology ; working length</subject><ispartof>Journal of endodontics, 2009-07, Vol.35 (7), p.962-965</ispartof><rights>American Association of Endodontists</rights><rights>2009 American Association of Endodontists</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-cadd1caad630c91e677cdb259793e187adcd963087715ccbaef0e2b4ee964b9f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-cadd1caad630c91e677cdb259793e187adcd963087715ccbaef0e2b4ee964b9f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099239909003690$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19567315$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files</title><title>Journal of endodontics</title><addtitle>J Endod</addtitle><description>Abstract Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of working length (WL) measurements by using the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator with rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments. Methods Twenty-eight teeth had their WLs determined with each electronic apex locator (EAL) by using 0.04 taper ProFiles sizes 40–20 in a crown-down technique until WL was reached. Four control teeth had their WL determined by using stainless steel hand files. The files were cemented at WL, and the teeth were extracted. The apical 4 mm of each root was shaved to the apical constriction, exposing the file. Photographs were taken under 15× and 30× magnification and projected at 360× and 720× for evaluation. Results The accuracy of the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator in locating the minor diameter within ±0.5 mm was 50%, 46.43%, and 39.29%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the EALs in locating the minor diameter. The determination of WL by using hand files in the control teeth was more accurate. Conclusions The Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator used with rotary NiTi files were able to locate the apical constriction within ±0.5 mm only 50% or less of the time.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Apex NRG ZFR</subject><subject>apical constriction</subject><subject>Dental Alloys</subject><subject>Dental Instruments</subject><subject>Dental Pulp Cavity - anatomy &amp; histology</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Electric Impedance</subject><subject>Electrical Equipment and Supplies</subject><subject>electronic apex locator</subject><subject>Endocrinology &amp; Metabolism</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mini Apex Locator</subject><subject>minor diameter</subject><subject>Nickel</subject><subject>Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Root ZX II</subject><subject>rotary files</subject><subject>Stainless Steel</subject><subject>Titanium</subject><subject>Tooth Apex - anatomy &amp; histology</subject><subject>working length</subject><issn>0099-2399</issn><issn>1878-3554</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUGP0zAQhS0EYsvCH-CAfOK0CXacxLWEkKqKLpXKIpVdtOJiOfYEnE3trp1U9N_j0EpIHDhZ43nvaeYbhF5TklNC63dd3nlweUGIyEmZk6J6gmZ0zucZq6ryKZqlhsgKJsQFehFjRwjljPHn6IKKquaMVjN0WDi8dvibPXi89Lu9CjZ6h32Lh5-At94P-Ps9Xq-v_tSLPfzCN9trfL_aXmHlDP5snT19b7xWgw-4OeK7aN2PZB5UOOIbqx-gz27toJwdd3hle4gv0bNW9RFend9LdLf6eLv8lG2-XK-Xi02mSyKGTCtjqFbK1IxoQaHmXJumqAQXDNKmymgjUm_OOa20bhS0BIqmBBB12YiWXaK3p9x98I8jxEHubNTQ98qBH6Oseck4ZyIJi5NQBx9jgFbug92l-SUlcqItOznRlhNtSUqZaCfTm3P62OzA_LWc8SbB-5MA0o4HC0FGbcFpMDaAHqTx9v_5H_6x6z7x1qp_gCPEzo_BJXqSylhIIr9O957OTQQhrBaE_QaMLKSN</recordid><startdate>20090701</startdate><enddate>20090701</enddate><creator>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc</creator><creator>Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD</creator><creator>Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090701</creationdate><title>An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files</title><author>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc ; Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD ; Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c409t-cadd1caad630c91e677cdb259793e187adcd963087715ccbaef0e2b4ee964b9f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Apex NRG ZFR</topic><topic>apical constriction</topic><topic>Dental Alloys</topic><topic>Dental Instruments</topic><topic>Dental Pulp Cavity - anatomy &amp; histology</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Electric Impedance</topic><topic>Electrical Equipment and Supplies</topic><topic>electronic apex locator</topic><topic>Endocrinology &amp; Metabolism</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mini Apex Locator</topic><topic>minor diameter</topic><topic>Nickel</topic><topic>Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Root ZX II</topic><topic>rotary files</topic><topic>Stainless Steel</topic><topic>Titanium</topic><topic>Tooth Apex - anatomy &amp; histology</topic><topic>working length</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of endodontics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Siu, Chris, DDS, BSc</au><au>Marshall, J. Gordon, DMD</au><au>Baumgartner, J. Craig, DDS, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files</atitle><jtitle>Journal of endodontics</jtitle><addtitle>J Endod</addtitle><date>2009-07-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>962</spage><epage>965</epage><pages>962-965</pages><issn>0099-2399</issn><eissn>1878-3554</eissn><abstract>Abstract Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of working length (WL) measurements by using the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator with rotary nickel-titanium (NiTi) instruments. Methods Twenty-eight teeth had their WLs determined with each electronic apex locator (EAL) by using 0.04 taper ProFiles sizes 40–20 in a crown-down technique until WL was reached. Four control teeth had their WL determined by using stainless steel hand files. The files were cemented at WL, and the teeth were extracted. The apical 4 mm of each root was shaved to the apical constriction, exposing the file. Photographs were taken under 15× and 30× magnification and projected at 360× and 720× for evaluation. Results The accuracy of the Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator in locating the minor diameter within ±0.5 mm was 50%, 46.43%, and 39.29%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the EALs in locating the minor diameter. The determination of WL by using hand files in the control teeth was more accurate. Conclusions The Root ZX II, Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator used with rotary NiTi files were able to locate the apical constriction within ±0.5 mm only 50% or less of the time.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>19567315</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0099-2399
ispartof Journal of endodontics, 2009-07, Vol.35 (7), p.962-965
issn 0099-2399
1878-3554
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67437739
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
Aged
Apex NRG ZFR
apical constriction
Dental Alloys
Dental Instruments
Dental Pulp Cavity - anatomy & histology
Dentistry
Electric Impedance
Electrical Equipment and Supplies
electronic apex locator
Endocrinology & Metabolism
Humans
Middle Aged
Mini Apex Locator
minor diameter
Nickel
Root Canal Preparation - instrumentation
Root ZX II
rotary files
Stainless Steel
Titanium
Tooth Apex - anatomy & histology
working length
title An In Vivo Comparison of the Root ZX II, the Apex NRG XFR, and Mini Apex Locator by Using Rotary Nickel-Titanium Files
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-28T05%3A37%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=An%20In%20Vivo%20Comparison%20of%20the%20Root%20ZX%20II,%20the%20Apex%20NRG%20XFR,%20and%20Mini%20Apex%20Locator%20by%20Using%20Rotary%20Nickel-Titanium%20Files&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20endodontics&rft.au=Siu,%20Chris,%20DDS,%20BSc&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=962&rft.epage=965&rft.pages=962-965&rft.issn=0099-2399&rft.eissn=1878-3554&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.025&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67437739%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67437739&rft_id=info:pmid/19567315&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0099239909003690&rfr_iscdi=true