Mugem Asli Gurel, Bagdagul Helvacioglu Kivanc, Adil Ekici
{"title":"Raypex 5、Raypex 6、iPex和iPex II型电子鼻尖定位仪的准确性比较:体外研究","authors":"Mugem Asli Gurel, Bagdagul Helvacioglu Kivanc, Adil Ekici","doi":"10.17096/jiufd.61309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aims of this study were to examine the accuracy of iPex II and to compare it with those of Raypex 5, Raypex 6 and iPex electronic apex locators (EALs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty fresh human mandibular premolar teeth were used in this study. Crown segments were cut and root canals were coronally flared. A #10 K-file was inserted until its tip can be seen within apical foramen to determine actual working length (AWL). Teeth were embedded in alginate and each multi-frequency EALs were randomly tested to determine the electronic working length (EWL). Differences between AWLs and EWLs were statistically compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were found between four EALs. EWL measurements by Raypex 5 were accurate in 64.29%, Raypex 6 in 53.58%, iPex in 64.29% and iPex II in 50% of the specimens, within the range of ±0.5 mm from the AWL.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of this in vitro experiment, our findings indicate that the accuracy of working length measurements calculated with iPex II was similar to those of other multi-frequency EALs used in this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":30947,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","volume":"51 1","pages":"28-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17096/jiufd.61309","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative assessment of the accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, iPex and iPex II electronic apex locators: An in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Mugem Asli Gurel, Bagdagul Helvacioglu Kivanc, Adil Ekici\",\"doi\":\"10.17096/jiufd.61309\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aims of this study were to examine the accuracy of iPex II and to compare it with those of Raypex 5, Raypex 6 and iPex electronic apex locators (EALs).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty fresh human mandibular premolar teeth were used in this study. Crown segments were cut and root canals were coronally flared. A #10 K-file was inserted until its tip can be seen within apical foramen to determine actual working length (AWL). Teeth were embedded in alginate and each multi-frequency EALs were randomly tested to determine the electronic working length (EWL). Differences between AWLs and EWLs were statistically compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were found between four EALs. EWL measurements by Raypex 5 were accurate in 64.29%, Raypex 6 in 53.58%, iPex in 64.29% and iPex II in 50% of the specimens, within the range of ±0.5 mm from the AWL.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of this in vitro experiment, our findings indicate that the accuracy of working length measurements calculated with iPex II was similar to those of other multi-frequency EALs used in this study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":30947,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"28-33\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.17096/jiufd.61309\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17096/jiufd.61309\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17096/jiufd.61309","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparative assessment of the accuracies of Raypex 5, Raypex 6, iPex and iPex II electronic apex locators: An in vitro study.
Purpose: The aims of this study were to examine the accuracy of iPex II and to compare it with those of Raypex 5, Raypex 6 and iPex electronic apex locators (EALs).
Materials and methods: Thirty fresh human mandibular premolar teeth were used in this study. Crown segments were cut and root canals were coronally flared. A #10 K-file was inserted until its tip can be seen within apical foramen to determine actual working length (AWL). Teeth were embedded in alginate and each multi-frequency EALs were randomly tested to determine the electronic working length (EWL). Differences between AWLs and EWLs were statistically compared.
Results: No significant differences were found between four EALs. EWL measurements by Raypex 5 were accurate in 64.29%, Raypex 6 in 53.58%, iPex in 64.29% and iPex II in 50% of the specimens, within the range of ±0.5 mm from the AWL.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of this in vitro experiment, our findings indicate that the accuracy of working length measurements calculated with iPex II was similar to those of other multi-frequency EALs used in this study.