Determination of Root Canal Length Up to Perforation Area Using Different Electronic Apex Locators and CBCT Images Obtained at Different Voxel Sizes: A Comparative Ex Vivo Study.

Zeliha Uğur Aydin, Duygu Göller Bulut
{"title":"Determination of Root Canal Length Up to Perforation Area Using Different Electronic Apex Locators and CBCT Images Obtained at Different Voxel Sizes: A Comparative Ex Vivo Study.","authors":"Zeliha Uğur Aydin,&nbsp;Duygu Göller Bulut","doi":"10.3290/j.cjdr.b1105877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the accuracy of electronic apex locators in the presence of blood and CBCT images obtained with two different voxel sizes (0.125 mm and 0.25 mm) in determining root canal length up to the perforation area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty extracted, single-rooted human teeth were selected and an artificial root perforation (0.4 ± 0.1 or 1.0 ± 0.2 mm diameter) was created in the middle third of the root. The actual root canal length up to the perforation area was determined under a stereomicroscope. CBCT images were obtained with a voxel size of 0.125 mm and 0.25 mm. The root canal length up to the perforation area was measured on CBCT images and recorded as the radiographic length. The teeth were embedded in alginate and root canal length up to the perforation area was measured using two different EALs (DentaPort ZX [Morita, Tokyo, Japan] and Gold Reciproc motor [VDW, Munich, Germany]) and recorded as the electronic length.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In teeth with an artificial root perforation 0.4 mm in diameter, the measurements obtained with DentaPort ZX were more accurate than with the Gold Reciproc motor (P ˂ 0.05), and on CBCT images, more accurate measurements were obtained with a voxel size of 0.125 mm compared to 0.25 mm (P ˂ 0.05). In teeth with an artificial root perforation 1.0 mm in diameter, the radiographic length was closer to actual length than the electronic length (P ˂ 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In artificial root perforations with a diameter of 0.4 mm, CBCT gives more reliable results than EALs. Both EAL and CBCT measurements were closer to actual length in artificial perforations that were 1.0 mm in diameter.</p>","PeriodicalId":74983,"journal":{"name":"The Chinese journal of dental research : the official journal of the Scientific Section of the Chinese Stomatological Association (CSA)","volume":"24 1","pages":"49-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Chinese journal of dental research : the official journal of the Scientific Section of the Chinese Stomatological Association (CSA)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3290/j.cjdr.b1105877","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Objective: To compare the accuracy of electronic apex locators in the presence of blood and CBCT images obtained with two different voxel sizes (0.125 mm and 0.25 mm) in determining root canal length up to the perforation area.

Methods: Forty extracted, single-rooted human teeth were selected and an artificial root perforation (0.4 ± 0.1 or 1.0 ± 0.2 mm diameter) was created in the middle third of the root. The actual root canal length up to the perforation area was determined under a stereomicroscope. CBCT images were obtained with a voxel size of 0.125 mm and 0.25 mm. The root canal length up to the perforation area was measured on CBCT images and recorded as the radiographic length. The teeth were embedded in alginate and root canal length up to the perforation area was measured using two different EALs (DentaPort ZX [Morita, Tokyo, Japan] and Gold Reciproc motor [VDW, Munich, Germany]) and recorded as the electronic length.

Results: In teeth with an artificial root perforation 0.4 mm in diameter, the measurements obtained with DentaPort ZX were more accurate than with the Gold Reciproc motor (P ˂ 0.05), and on CBCT images, more accurate measurements were obtained with a voxel size of 0.125 mm compared to 0.25 mm (P ˂ 0.05). In teeth with an artificial root perforation 1.0 mm in diameter, the radiographic length was closer to actual length than the electronic length (P ˂ 0.05).

Conclusion: In artificial root perforations with a diameter of 0.4 mm, CBCT gives more reliable results than EALs. Both EAL and CBCT measurements were closer to actual length in artificial perforations that were 1.0 mm in diameter.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用不同的电子顶点定位器和不同体素大小的CBCT图像确定根管长度至穿孔区域:一项比较离体研究。
目的:比较两种不同体素尺寸(0.125 mm和0.25 mm)的CBCT图像和有血情况下电子根尖定位仪测定根管至穿孔区域长度的准确性。方法:选择40颗拔除的单根人牙,在根中三分之一处制造直径为0.4±0.1或1.0±0.2 mm的人工根孔。在体视显微镜下测定到穿孔区域的实际根管长度。获得体素尺寸分别为0.125 mm和0.25 mm的CBCT图像。在CBCT图像上测量根管长度至穿孔区域,并记录为x线片长度。将牙齿嵌入藻酸盐中,使用两种不同的EALs (DentaPort ZX [Morita, Tokyo, Japan]和Gold Reciproc motor [VDW, Munich, Germany])测量根管长度至穿孔区域,并记录为电子长度。结果:对于直径为0.4 mm的人工牙根穿孔,使用DentaPort ZX获得的测量结果比使用Gold Reciproc电机更准确(P值小于0.05),并且在CBCT图像上,体素尺寸为0.125 mm比0.25 mm获得的测量结果更准确(P值小于0.05)。对于直径为1.0 mm的人工根孔,x线测量长度比电子测量长度更接近实际长度(P值小于0.05)。结论:对于直径为0.4 mm的人工牙根穿孔,CBCT的结果比EALs更可靠。对于直径为1.0 mm的人工射孔,EAL和CBCT测量值都更接近实际长度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Application of Chairside CAD/CAM and Its Influencing Factors among Chinese Dental Practitioners: a Crosssectional Study. CB1 Promotes Osteogenic Differentiation Potential of Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells by Enhancing Mitochondrial Transfer of Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells. Establishment of an Animal Model of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Invading the Mandible. GREM1 Negatively Regulates Osteo-/Dentinogenic Differentiation of Dental Pulp Stem Cells via Association with YWHAH. PHD2 shRNA-Modified Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells Facilitate Periodontal Bone Repair in Response to Inflammatory Condition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1