Search

Aim: To compare in vivo three different electronic root canal length measurement devices: Dentaport ZX, Raypex 5 and ProPex II., Methodology: Thirty single-rooted permanent teeth scheduled for extraction because of periodontal disease were selected from 10 adult patients (ranging from 45 to 67 years) and divided into three groups of 10 teeth. Before the extraction, an access cavity was prepared and the crown was adjusted to establish a stable reference point for all measurements. The working length in Group 1 was determined using the Dentaport ZX apex locator. A K-file with the largest diameter that could reach the last green bar on the screen was stabilized in the canal using a dual-curable flow resin composite. The same procedure was used for the Raypex 5 (the file reached the last yellow bar) and Propex II (0.0 orange bar) apex locators. The teeth were then extracted and cleared. The distance between the tip of the file and the major foramen was then calculated for each tooth using digital photography according to Axiovision AC software (Carl Zeiss). Positive values were assigned when the file tip passed beyond the major foramen, negative values when the tip was short of the foramen and zero value when the file tip and the foramen coincided. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test (P ≤ 0.05)., Results:   Dentaport ZX, Raypex 5 and ProPex ΙΙ produced, respectively, 6, 2 and 4 out of 10 correct measurements, 0, 6 and 5 long measurements and 4, 2, and 1 short measurements. The differences between the three electronic root canal length measurement devices were not significant (P = 0.507)., Conclusions: Under the in vivo conditions of this study, the three electronic root canal length measurement devices were not significantly different in terms of locating the major foramen., (© 2012 International Endodontic Journal.)

The importance of an accurate diagnosis of the morphology of the root canal system is a prerequisite for successful root canal treatment and has been emphasized throughout the literature. Root canal morphology of premolar teeth, either maxillary or mandibular, and the discrepancies between first and second premolars, have been investigated and reported. A case report is presented of the root canal treatment of a mandibular second premolar with four root canals. As far as the reviewed literature revealed, up to three root canals in mandibular premolars have been reported. No previous report of a similar case of four root canals in a mandibular premolar was found.

The differing morphological manifestations of the root canal system have been the subject of research, and the incidence of various shapes of root canal systems has been classified. The present case describes the root canal treatment of a rare morphological pattern, namely a mandibular permanent canine with three root canals. No report of a similar case has been published previously.