The aims of this study were to determine the efficacy of the KontrolFlexTM AccufileTM compared to the READY•STEEL™ Flexofile® using an electronic apex locator and to evaluate the instrument’s design via scanning electron microscopy. Actual canal lengths of thirty extracted teeth were determined under magnification. An alginate model was used to determine experimental canal lengths with the Root ZX II apex locator and size #10 Accufiles and Flexofiles. Differences between actual lengths and experimental lengths were compared with Student’s t test. The average experimental lengths were short of the actual length by -0.10 mm (±0.34) and -0.12 mm (±0.16) for the Accufile and Flexofile, respectively with no statistical difference (p > 0.05). SEM images revealed similar non-cutting “batt” tips and a square cross-section for the Accufile and triangular for the Flexofile. Both files provided similarly high levels of reliability when used with the Root ZX II electronic apex locator.

Diversos procedimentos endodônticos dependem da utilização das radiografias periapicais. O exame convencional ainda é o método de eleição para a prática clínica, a despeito dos avanços trazidos com os sistemas digitais e com os localizadores eletrônicos. Ocorre, porém, que nos estudos científicos não se verifica adequada padronização quanto aos modelos de estudo utilizados. Ao mensurar e comparar a densidade óptica das imagens do canal e dentina radicular de radiografias periapicais de um modelo experimental e de indivíduos vivos, este trabalho se propôs avaliar a viabilidade da utilização deste modelo em estudos endodônticos radiográficos. Após coleta de dados avalizada cientificamente pela utilização do aparelho fotodensitômetro (MRA), e análise estatística (Testes de Kolmogorov-Smirnof, Levene com correção de Bonferroni, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney e de correlação de Pearson), observou-se que os resultados obtidos não evidenciaram diferenças estatisticamente significativas entre as radiografias do modelo e dos pacientes. Diante disso, conclui-se que o modelo experimental é adequado para a utilização em experimentos endodôntico-radiográficos. / Several endodontic procedures depend of dental radiographs. The conventional radiograph is the usual method to clinical practice, even the advances proportionate by digital systems and electronic apex locators. However, the endodontic studies dont display standardized radiographic models. Analyzing the optical density of the images from an experimental model and patients, based on digital photodensitometer (MRA), this study evaluated the viability of this model in endodontic studies. The Kolmogorov-Smirnof, Levene, Bonferronis correction, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney and Pearsons correlation tests dont display statistical differences between images from patients and the model. Thus concluded that is adequate to use in radiographicendodontic studies.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Introduction: One of the challenges of non-surgical root canal treatment (NSRCT) is determining the working length of the canal which indicates the exact end point of root canal preparation and obturation. The development of the Electronic Apex Locator (EAL) has helped the clinician to determine the location of the apical foramen, and hence the working length, when performing NSRCT. Objective: The objective of this in vitro study was to determine the accuracy of a new EAL, the E-PEX (Changzhou Eighteeth Medical Technology Co., China), and compare it to a commonly used EAL, the Root ZX II (J. Morita Corp, Kyoto, Japan), for determining the location of the apical foramen. Materials and Methods: Twenty extracted single rooted teeth were used in this study. The crowns were removed and the distance from a coronal reference point to the apical foramen was measured utilizing a k-file and direct visualization under magnification. Teeth were then mounted in alginate and measurements for the apical foramen were made using the Root ZX II and the E-PEX. The difference between the actual canal length and the electronic length was then calculated and compared. Results: The mean true difference was -0.20, and -0.19 for the E-PEX and Root ZX II respectively. The mean absolute difference was 0.28, and 0.26 for the E-PEX and Root ZX II respectively. Paired t-tests done separately for true differences (p = 0.45) and absolute differences (p = 0.21) showed no significant difference among EALs. The percentage of measurements falling within 0.5 mm of the actual canal lengths for each EAL were 95% and 90% for the E-PEX and Root ZX II respectively. McNemar’s test was used to compare between the two test methods for the percentage within 0.5 mm and revealed no significant difference (p = 0.32). Conclusion: The Root ZX II had an average measurement that was slightly closer to the actual length of the canal when compared to the E-PEX, while the E-PEX had a higher percentage of measurement within 0.5 mm of the apical foramen. However, these differences were not statistically significant.

No description available.