Evaluation of Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 electronic apex locators: an in vivo study

• Autores: Saddy Moscoso, Kenneth Pineda, Juan Basilio, Carlos Alvarado, Miguel Roig Cayón, Fernando Duran-Sindreu Terol
• Localización: Medicina oral, patología oral y cirugía bucal. Ed. inglesa, ISSN-e 1698-6946, Vol. 19, Nº. 2, 2014, págs. 202-205
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal.

    2014 Mar 1;19 (2):e202-5.

    Evaluation of Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6: An in vivo study e202 Journal section: Clinical and Experimental Dentistry Publication Types: Research Evaluation of Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 electronic apex locators: An in vivo study Saddy Moscoso 1 , Kenneth Pineda 1 , Juan Basilio 1 , Carlos Alvarado 2 , Miguel Roig 2 , Fernando Duran- Sindreu 3 1 MD, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain 2 MD, DDS, PhD, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain 3 Department of Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain Correspondence:

    Dentistry Faculty Universitat Internacional de Catalunya C/Josep Trueta s/n. 08195 Sant Cugat del Vallès, Spain fduranst@hotmail.com Received: 10/02/2013 Accepted: 04/05/2013 Abstract Introduction: Raypex 6 is an electronic apex locator (EAL) that has not yet been tested in vivo. The purpose of this in vivo study was to compare the accuracy of two EALs: the Dentaport ZX and the Raypex 6.

    Material and Methods: The study involved 36 straight single-rooted teeth. A 10-K file was advanced until the EAL detected the major foramen. The file was fixed in a replaceable pattern of light-cured composite. The apical part of each canal was trimmed to expose the file tip. The distances from the file tips to the major foramen were measured.

    Results: Wilcoxon's signed Rank test found no significant differences between the Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 in terms of their abilities to detect the major foramen (P = .52) The Dentaport ZX was accurate 82.35% of the time to ± 0.5 mm and 97.05% of the time to ± 1 mm, whereas the Raypex 6 was accurate 88.22% of the time to ± 0.5 mm and 100% of the time to ± 1 mm.

    Conclusions: No statistically significant differences were observed between the performance of the Dentaport ZX and Raypex 6 EALs under the in vivo clinical conditions used in this study.