Apex locators / endodontics courses

An overview of electronic
apex locators: part 2
INDIAN DENTAL ACADEMY
Leader in Continuing Dental Education
www.indiandentalacademy.com

In Part I , we were introduced to the micro-anatomical features of the
apical terminus and the ability of a tooth to function as a capacitor.
In the second part II, we are going to be introduced to:
 (a) the different types of electronic apex locator (EAL);
 (b) their modes of action;
 (c) their relative accuracies and
 (d) methods to optimise their success in clinical practice.

 Negm in 1982 introduced a novel method of determining the length of root canal
without the use of radiographs.
 In 1918, Custer was the first to report the use of electric current to customize
working length.
 In the year 1942 he discovered that the electrical resistance between the
periodontal ligament and the oral mucosa was a constant value of 6.5 kilo-ohms.
 The electrical circuit is complete when the endodontic instrument is advanced
apically inside the root canal until it touches periodontal tissue.

 Resistance is the opposition that a substance offers to the flow of electriccurrent.
 Sunada carried on earlier work by Custer and Suzuki ,determined that the
electrical resistance between an endodontic instrument at the apical foramen
and an electrode attached to oral mucous membrane was approximately 6.5 kW.
RBEALs (such as the Root Canal Meter (Onuki Medical Co.,Tokyo) and
Dentometer (Dahlin Electromedicine,Copenhagen) are based on a simple model.
They apply a small direct current to the tooth under investigation of known
voltage.
 The resistance at each level of the RCS can be calculated using these two
variables usingOhm’s Law.
 (Ohm's Law is the mathematical relationship among electric current, resistance,
and voltage. )
 At the periodontal ligament space (PDLS), the resistance of the circuit will equal
6.5 kΩ and the RBEAL are programmed to detect this value .

 Although these devices were accurate under dry conditions, their accuracy
decreased when electrolytes, pulp tissue, inflammatory exudate or excessive
haemorrhage were associated with the RCS.
 As soon as the file tip touched an electrolyte, the direct current (DC) voltage
would polarise the tissue, complete the circuit and incorrectly register that the
PDLS had been reached.
 The devices also ignored the capacitance component of the circuit.
 Furthermore, the use of a DC would often cause an electric shock sensation to be
felt by the patient which is clearly disadvantageous.

 The effective resistance of an electric circuit or component to alternating current,
arising from the combined effects of ohmic resistance and reactance.
 To overcome the aforementioned problems, the next set of EALs were based on
the impedance of the circuit set up within the RCS.
 However, the impedance (and therefore capacitance) of the RCS was dependent
on many variables and would vary between different RCSs.
 Consequently, the biggest disadvantage for IBALs was the need for individual
calibration between each tooth.
 To decrease the variable capacitance features the circuit, EALs like the Endocater
(HygenicCorp., Akron, OH, USA) were developed which incorporated an
insulated file.
 However, the insulated sheath could not enter narrow canals and was often
rubbed off.

 Different fluids within the RCS will each have different diaelectric constants (ε).
 This will clearly alter the capacitance of the entire circuit and may generate
erroneous readings.
 The literature pertaining to second generation EALS reports much variation in
terms of their accuracy.
 Fouad et al. looked at the Endo Analyser (Analytic/ Endo, Orange, California,
USA) and Apex Finder and noted that they were only accurate 67% of the time at
being +/− 0.5 mm from the apex.
 However, like most IBALs, it was found to be inaccurate in the presence of
conductive irrigants (with different diaelectric constants), a shortcoming which
the manufacturers were quick to point out.

 These use multiple frequencies to determine the distance between an
endodontic instrument and the end of a canal, unlike second generation EALs
which only use a singleAC of known frequency.
 Third generation EALs work by calculating the impedance ratio of two electric
currents with different wave frequencies. One wave will be of a high frequency
(HF) while the other will have a low frequency (LF).
 Equation 1: Ratio = HK / LF.
 The quotient of these two frequencies is nearly 1 when the endodontic file is
some distance from the apical terminus. However, at the apical constriction, the
capacitive effect of the impedance variable plays a much bigger role and the ratio
of Equation 1 approaches a value of 0.67.
 It is this change in ratio at the apical constriction which some third generation
EALs detect.

 This phenomenon is clearly related to the morphology of the apical constriction.
 If it is absent or the canal has an open apex, the accuracy of these devices has
been shown to diminish.
 Unlike IBALs, the accuracy of third generation EALs tends to be unaffected by
the presence of electrolytes in the RCS.
 This is because different electrolytes will have different dielectric constants
...(Equation 2)
 Equation 2: C= ε × A
D
 C =The capacitance of the tooth.
 A =The surface area of the endodontic file in the RCS (conductor) and the PDLS (conductor)
 D =The distance between the endodontic file and the PDLS.
 ε = Diaelectric constant of the irrigant in the RCS

 The Root ZX (J. Morita,Tokyo, Japan) is an example of a third generation EAL.
 It is based on two electric currents which have a frequency of either 8 kHz or
400Hz.
 it produces more stable electronic readings when the RCS contains an electrolyte
(such as NaOCl).
 In vitro when used on permanent teeth, the accuracy of the Root ZX varies from
84% to 100%.
 In the presence of different irrigants, the accuracy was similarly found to be very
high, with reported accuracies varying from 83% to 96%.
 In vivo studies that have extracted the teeth (after investigation) have reported
similar accuracies for the Root ZX ranging from 83%29 to 100%.

 The Root ZX has been combined with a handpiece to determine the length of the
RCS as a rotary file is being used.
 This is named as the Tri-Auto ZX(with an integrated handpiece) but more
recently as the Dentaport ZX.
 TheTri-Auto ZX has been found to have a similar accuracy to the Root ZX at 95%.

 The Apex Finder, Model 7005 (Analytic Endodontics, Orange,
California) is multifrequency based EAL that uses five different frequencies (0.5,
1, 2, 4 and 8 kHz) to measure the length of a RCS.
 Pommer at al.37 reported that it correctly identified the position of the AC in 94%
of vital canals, but only 77% of the time in necrotic canals.
 Their statistical analyses suggested that these two values were significantly
different from one another.
 Unlike Dunlap et al.’s study,34 the findings of Pommer et al. suggest that third
generation EAL work better in vital canals than necrotic canals.
 This made point from an impedance change.
 This can lead to error as there may be considerable difference between the actual
AC and the radiographic apex.

 The Ray-Pex 4 and 5 (Forum EngineeringTechnologies, Rishon Lezion, Israel) are
examples of fourth generation EALs.
 Although it uses two frequencies of 400 Hz and 8 KHz to determine RCS length,
the device only uses one frequency at a time (unlike third generation EALs which
use both simultaneously).
 The manufacturers claim that using each frequency separately and by calculating
the standard deviation of the differences between the two frequencies increases
the accuracy of the device.
 The electrical ‘noise’ inherent in these filters may decrease the accuracy of the
third generation EAL.
 The manufacturers claim is based on the fact that the Ray-Pex 4 does not
incorporate a filter and therefore may be more accurate than a third generation
EAL.

 El Ayouti et al.40 reported that the Root ZX was more accurate at determining the
apical terminus (within 1 mm) compared to the Ray-Pex 4.
 Wrbas et al., Pascon and Stoll found no difference in accuracy between the
Dentaport ZX and the Ray Apex EAL.
 Kaufman et al. similarly noted that there was no difference between the two
EALs in the presence of different irrigating media.

 The Elements Diagnostic Unit and Apex Locator (Sybron Endo, Anaheim,
California, USA) is another type of FGEAL.
 It assimilates resistance and capacitance measurements and compares them to
an internal database to determine the distance between an endodontic file and
the apical terminus.
 The device uses two frequencies: 0.5 kHz and 4 kHz.
 The signals are converted to an analogue signal, which is subsequently amplified
before being passed on to some form of resistor/capacitor based parallel circuit.
 The resultant waveforms are then processed to reduce noise, which will reduce
error and produce consistently more accurate readings regarding the position of
the apical terminus.

 1. Radiographs: A pre-operative radiograph is essential to obtain information
about the RCS’s shape/ anatomy, before accessing the pulp chamber and using
an EAL to determine the estimatedWL.
 The access cavity: Any metallic restorations should be removed from the access
cavity to prevent electrical shunting.
There should be no fluid in the pulp chamber. Generally , modern apex locators
work best in a ‘moist’ environment.This can be achieved by incomplete drying
with the paper point.
 The irrigating media:The presence of different irrigating media in the RCS does
not impact significantly on the performance of third/fourth generation apex
locators. One simply must ensure that the irrigant has not flooded the pulp
chamber.

 The endodontic file: An endodontic file that will contact the walls of the RCS
should be attached to the EAL.The metal which the file is made of does not
affect the accuracy of the EAL
 The ‘Apex (or 0)’ reading: Advance the file until the visual analogue displays
‘Apex’ or ‘0’. EALs are most accurate when the file contacts the PDL and the
display shows an ‘Apex’ or ‘0’ reading.This will ensure that the file is within the
RCS but still close to the PDL.
 Re-checking the WL:The working length should be re-checked with an EAL,
after the coronal two thirds of the RCS has been shaped. Shaping the coronal
portion of the RCS will decrease the effective curvature of the canal.This may
reduce the initialWL of the tooth.Therefore its length needs to be re-measured
before shaping the apical terminus.

 The battery: Low voltages cause electronic errors.Therefore ensure that the
EAL’s batteries are well charged before using them, to prevent erroneous
readings from being generated.
 Perforations: If a periodontal perforation is suspected, an EAL can be used to
check whether the integrity of the RCS has been breached. A small file should be
attached to the device and applied to the suspected perforation site.Any contact
with exposed PDL will complete the circuit and register as an ‘Apex (or zero)’
reading.This will alert the operator that a perforation is present and that local
measures need to be taken to restore the integrity of the RCS.
 Unstable readings:The ‘Apex reading’ should only be accepted as being
accurate if the scale bar of the EAL visual analogue is (a) stable and (b) moves in
symphony with the movements of the file in the RCS

Given the accuracies of modern generation EALs, the clinician should be
able to consistently identify the apical limit of the RCS under treatment.
Their use in conjunction with appropriate radiographs and the clinician’s
knowledge of average RCS lengths and anatomy will maximise the
successful outcome of any orthograde endodontic treatment.

Apex locators / endodontics courses

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (12)

Similar to Apex locators / endodontics courses (20)

More from Indian dental academy (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Apex locators / endodontics courses