Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

OPEN ACCESS

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
2 "Root perforation"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Research Articles
Detection of root perforations using conventional and digital intraoral radiography, multidetector computed tomography and cone beam computed tomography
Abbas Shokri, Amir Eskandarloo, Maruf Noruzi-Gangachin, Samira Khajeh
Restor Dent Endod 2015;40(1):58-67.   Published online November 13, 2014
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2015.40.1.58
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Objectives

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of conventional intraoral (CI) radiography, photostimulable phosphor (PSP) radiography, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) for detection of strip and root perforations in endodontically treated teeth.

Materials and Methods

Mesial and distal roots of 72 recently extracted molar were endodontically prepared. Perforations were created in 0.2, 0.3, or 0.4 mm diameter around the furcation of 48 roots (strip perforation) and at the external surface of 48 roots (root perforation); 48 roots were not perforated (control group). After root obturation, intraoral radiography, CBCT and MDCT were taken. Discontinuity in the root structure was interpreted as perforation. Two observers examined the images. Data were analyzed using Stata software and Chi-square test.

Results

The sensitivity and specificity of CI, PSP, CBCT and MDCT in detection of strip perforations were 81.25% and 93.75%, 85.42% and 91.67%, 97.92% and 85.42%, and 72.92% and 87.50%, respectively. For diagnosis of root perforation, the sensitivity and specificity were 87.50% and 93.75%, 89.58% and 91.67%, 97.92% and 85.42%, and 81.25% and 87.50%, respectively. For detection of strip perforation, the difference between CBCT and all other methods including CI, PSP and MDCT was significant (p < 0.05). For detection of root perforation, only the difference between CBCT and MDCT was significant, and for all the other methods no statistically significant difference was observed.

Conclusions

If it is not possible to diagnose the root perforations by periapical radiographs, CBCT is the best radiographic technique while MDCT is not recommended.

  • 20 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer
Accuracy of Root ZX in teeth with simulated root perforation in the presence of gel or liquid type endodontic irrigant
Hyeong-Soon Shin, Won-Kyung Yang, Mi-Ri Kim, Hyun-Jung Ko, Kyung-Mo Cho, Se-Hee Park, Jin-Woo Kim
Restor Dent Endod 2012;37(3):149-154.   Published online August 29, 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2012.37.3.149
AbstractAbstract PDFPubReaderePub
Objectives

To evaluate the accuracy of the Root ZX in teeth with simulated root perforation in the presence of gel or liquid type endodontic irrigants, such as saline, 5.25% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), 2% chlorhexidine liquid, 2% chlorhexidine gel, and RC-Prep, and also to determine the electrical conductivities of these endodontic irrigants.

Materials and Methods

A root perforation was simulated on twenty freshly extracted teeth by means of a small perforation made on the proximal surface of the root at 4 mm from the anatomic apex. Root ZX was used to locate root perforation and measure the electronic working lengths. The results obtained were compared with the actual working length (AWL) and the actual location of perforations (AP), allowing tolerances of 0.5 or 1.0 mm. Measurements within these limits were considered as acceptable. Chi-square test or the Fisher's exact test was used to evaluate significance. Electrical conductivities of each irrigant were also measured with an electrical conductivity tester.

Results

The accuracies of the Root ZX in perforated teeth were significantly different between liquid types (saline, NaOCl) and gel types (chlorhexidine gel, RC-Prep). The accuracies of electronic working lengths in perforated teeth were higher in gel types than in liquid types. The accuracy in locating root perforation was higher in liquid types than gel types. 5.25% NaOCl had the highest electrical conductivity, whereas 2% chlorhexidine gel and RC-Prep gel had the lowest electrical conductivities among the five irrigants.

Conclusions

Different canal irrigants with different electrical conductivities may affect the accuracy of the Root ZX in perforated teeth.

  • 21 View
  • 0 Download
Close layer

Restor Dent Endod : Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics
Close layer
TOP