title: A comparative evaluation of electronic and radiographic determination of root canal length in primary teeth: An in vitro study.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the root canal length determination by Electronic apex locator (EAL) (Raypex 5) and conventional radiography, and then compare them with the actual measurements obtained by direct visualization.
  
  
  METHODS
  This study was conducted at the Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
  
  
  METHODS
  One hundred single rooted primary teeth extracted due to extensive caries, trauma, serial extraction or unwillingness of the parent to save the teeth were selected. The teeth were numbered and root canal length was determined using the visual, electronic and the radiographic methods. The actual, electronic and the radiographic measurements were recorded.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were analyzed using Intraclass correlation test and linear regression analysis.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The accuracy of EAL and radiographic methods were 92% and 72%, respectively within + 0.5 mm. Both the electronic and conventional radiographic methods showed a high correlation and agreement (ICC intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.99 and 0.98 respectively) with the actual measurements.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  EALs proved to be more accurate in determining the root canal length than the radiographic method.
authors: Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Government Dental College, Trivandrum, Kerala, India.
authors: Iyer Satishkumar
authors: IS
authors: Krishnan
authors: Sheela
authors: S
authors: Sreedharan
keywords: Electronic apex locators; intraoral periapical radiography; primary teeth; root canal length determination
references: Indian J Dent Res. 2007 Apr-Jun;18(2):60-2
references: 17502709
references: J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2011 Oct-Dec;29(4):300-4
references: 22016313
references: ASDC J Dent Child. 1996 Nov-Dec;63(6):414-7
references: 9017174
references: J Endod. 2002 Feb;28(2):116-9
references: 11833683
references: J Endod. 1998 Jun;24(6):438-41
references: 9693591
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1981 Jan;51(1):100-7
references: 6936683
references: Int Endod J. 2002 Feb;35(2):186-92
references: 11843975
references: Pediatr Dent. 2009 Jul-Aug;31(4):320-2
references: 19722441
references: Pediatr Dent. 2008 Nov-Dec;30(6):496-8
references: 19186775
references: J Endod. 2002 Jul;28(7):524-6
references: 12126381
references: Int Endod J. 2002 May;35(5):447-52
references: 12059916
references: Int Endod J. 2006 Aug;39(8):595-609
references: 16872454
references: Clin Oral Investig. 2008 Jun;12(2):137-41
references: 18027005
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2003 Jan;95(1):94-100
references: 12539034
references: Int Endod J. 2006 May;39(5):408-14
references: 16640641
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1992 Dec;74(6):796-800
references: 1488238
references: J Endod. 2001 Mar;27(3):209-11
references: 11487154
references: Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1972 Jan;33(1):101-10
references: 4500261
references: J Endod. 1983 Feb;9(2):71-5
references: 6590767
references: Int Endod J. 2008 Apr;41(4):317-21
references: 18217990