K M Nanda Kishor1. 1. Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Pacific Dental College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India. drnands@yahoo.co.in
Abstract
AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the working length determination done using three methods, namely, apex locator (Foramatron D-10, Parkell), radiovisiography (Planmeca) and conventional radiography (Prostyle intra, Planmeca). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experiment, to determine the working length, 35 single-rooted teeth were selected and each tooth was subjected to all the three methods of the working length determination. This was compared with the actual working length measured utilizing ground sections of the individual teeth. RESULTS: The results revealed that all the three methods located the apex nearly as accurately as the actual root canal length obtained by histological ground sectioning, and among three methods apex locator being the closest to the actual root canal length. CONCLUSION: The study concludes that all the three techniques are equally effective in determining working length.
AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare the working length determination done using three methods, namely, apex locator (Foramatron D-10, Parkell), radiovisiography (Planmeca) and conventional radiography (Prostyle intra, Planmeca). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this experiment, to determine the working length, 35 single-rooted teeth were selected and each tooth was subjected to all the three methods of the working length determination. This was compared with the actual working length measured utilizing ground sections of the individual teeth. RESULTS: The results revealed that all the three methods located the apex nearly as accurately as the actual root canal length obtained by histological ground sectioning, and among three methods apex locator being the closest to the actual root canal length. CONCLUSION: The study concludes that all the three techniques are equally effective in determining working length.