Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorYolagiden, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorErşahan, Şeyda
dc.contributor.authorSuyun, Gökhan
dc.contributor.authorBilgeç, Ertürk
dc.contributor.authorAydın, Cumhur
dc.date.accessioned10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T19:36:27Z
dc.date.available10.07.201910:49:14
dc.date.available2019-07-10T19:36:27Z
dc.date.issued2018en_US
dc.identifier.citationErşahan, Ş., Yolagiden, M., Suyun, G., Bilgeç, E. ve Aydın, C. (2017). Comparison of four electronic apex locators in detecting working length: An ex vivo study. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 19(12), 1427-1433. https://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2444en_US
dc.identifier.issn1526-3711
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/1165
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2444
dc.description.abstractAim: To compare the accuracy of four different electronic apex locators (EALs) in detecting a position 0.5 mm short of the major foramen. Materials and methods: The actual working length of thirty-five extracted human teeth was determined visually as 0.5 mm short of the apical foramen. After actual working length measurements, electronic working length was measured with four different EALs (Apex Pointer+, Raypex 5, Apex ID, and Raypex 6). Measurements were repeated three times by different operators. The data were analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the repeated measure analysis of variance (rANOVA) and Bonferroni post hoc tests. The significance level was set at p = 0.05. Results: The mean differences between electronic and actual working length were-0.305 mm, 0.098 mm, 0.037, and 0.144 mm for the Apex Pointer+, the Raypex 5, the Apex ID, and the Raypex 6, respectively. Multiple paired comparisons (Bonferroni test) also showed the Apex Pointer+ is significantly different from the Raypex 5, Apex ID and Raypex 6 (p = 0.000, p = 0.001, and p = 0.001 respectively). Conclusion: All EALs showed an acceptable determination of the working length between the ranges of ± 0.5mm except for the Apex Pointer+ device, which had the lowest accuracy. Further studies may be beneficial especially to better evaluate the accuracy of the Apex Pointer+. Clinical significance: This article shows that Apex ID, which has only recently been introduced into the market, showed an acceptable determination of the working length. Its accuracy was similar to that of Raypex 5 and 6.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherJaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltden_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccessen_US
dc.subjectApex IDen_US
dc.subjectApex Pointer+en_US
dc.subjectApicalConstrictionen_US
dc.subjectElectronic Apex Locatoren_US
dc.subjectRaypex 5en_US
dc.subjectRaypex 6en_US
dc.subjectWorking Length Determinationen_US
dc.titleComparison of four electronic apex locators in detecting working length: An ex vivo studyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Contemporary Dental Practiceen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Endodonti Ana Bilim Dalıen_US
dc.authorid0000-0002-0354-5108en_US
dc.identifier.volume19en_US
dc.identifier.issue12en_US
dc.identifier.startpage1427en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1433en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2444en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record