Volume 3, Issue 1 (Journal of Clinical and Basic Research(JCBR) 2019)
jcbr 2019, 3(1): 1-5 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Pourshakibaei P, Mashkouri Najafi M T, Akbari Zahmati A H, Afiat M, Vaghari M. Comparison of Accuracy of Self-Developing Films and Conventional Films for Radiographic Determination of Distance between File Tip and Radiographic Apex in Root Canal Therapy. jcbr 2019; 3 (1) :1-5
URL: http://jcbr.goums.ac.ir/article-1-189-en.html
URL: http://jcbr.goums.ac.ir/article-1-189-en.html
Parichehr Pourshakibaei1 
, Mohammad Taghi Mashkouri Najafi2 , Amir Hossein Akbari Zahmati * 2, Mehrnoush Afiat2 , Masoumeh Vaghari2
, Mohammad Taghi Mashkouri Najafi2 , Amir Hossein Akbari Zahmati * 2, Mehrnoush Afiat2 , Masoumeh Vaghari2
1- Dental Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
2- Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
2- Student Research Committee, School of Dentistry, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
Abstract: (4064 Views)
Background and objectives: The developing process is necessary for converting a latent image into a visible image in conventional dental x-ray films. Despite the considerable advances made in development of radiographic equipment, there are also still some unresolved issues in this field. New self-developing film is an alternative to manual processing. The purpose of this study was to compare accuracy of self-developing films and conventional films (E-speed) for determination of the distance between file tip and radiographic apex in root canal therapy in laboratory conditions.
Methods: This study was done on 25 single-canal, single-rooted premolar teeth. After obtaining tooth length, each tooth was accessed and K-files No. 15 and 25 were placed inside the canal tip to tip with the tooth apex. Then, 1mm of the actual tooth length was reduced and periapical radiographs were captured using self-developing films and conventional films (E-speed) under standard conditions. Two endodontists observed the films twice at different intervals. The obtained data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 18) using paired t-test.
Results: Average distance between the tip of file No.15 to the radiographic apex in conventional film and self-developing film was 0.37 mm and 0.35 mm, respectively. The mean working length measured using K-file No. 25 was 0.44 mm in conventional film and 0.40 mm in self-developing film. There was no statistically significant difference between the two methods for measuring the working length.
Conclusion: The self-developing films provide a radiographic image that is diagnostically equivalent to the conventional film for measurement of the distance from the file tip to the radiographic apex in single-rooted teeth with a single canal.
Methods: This study was done on 25 single-canal, single-rooted premolar teeth. After obtaining tooth length, each tooth was accessed and K-files No. 15 and 25 were placed inside the canal tip to tip with the tooth apex. Then, 1mm of the actual tooth length was reduced and periapical radiographs were captured using self-developing films and conventional films (E-speed) under standard conditions. Two endodontists observed the films twice at different intervals. The obtained data were analyzed with SPSS software (version 18) using paired t-test.
Results: Average distance between the tip of file No.15 to the radiographic apex in conventional film and self-developing film was 0.37 mm and 0.35 mm, respectively. The mean working length measured using K-file No. 25 was 0.44 mm in conventional film and 0.40 mm in self-developing film. There was no statistically significant difference between the two methods for measuring the working length.
Conclusion: The self-developing films provide a radiographic image that is diagnostically equivalent to the conventional film for measurement of the distance from the file tip to the radiographic apex in single-rooted teeth with a single canal.
References
1. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014. [Google Scholar]
2. Foxon G, Griffith J, Price M. Cineradiographic Techniques. The British journal of radiology. 1955;28(330):336-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
3. Torabinejad M, Fouad A, Walton RE. Endodontics-e-book: Principles and practice. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014:242-63. [Google Scholar]
4. Eikenberg S, Dolley G. Detection of interproximal caries using methods applicable to a field environment: digital radiography, manually processed film, and self-developing film. Military medicine. 2001; 166(4):338-41. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
5. Mentes A, Gencoglu N. Canal length evaluation of curved canals by direct digital or conventional radiography. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology. 2002;93(1):88-91. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6. Viner MD, Robson J. Post-Mortem Forensic Dental Radiography-a review of current techniques and future developments. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging. 2017 ;8:22-37. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
7. Farida A, Maryam E, Ali M, Ehsan M, Sajad Y, Soraya K. A comparison between conventional and digital radiography in root canal working length determination. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2013 ;24(2):229-33. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8. AlShwaimi E, Majeed A. Perceived quality, clarity, and accuracy of manually processed and self-developing radiographs in endodontics. International journal of health sciences. 2013;7(2):116-23. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Robillard JJ, inventor; Scully Richard L 1425 Seminole Trail Suite 310 Charlottesville Birginia 22906, assignee. Photosensitive compositions for direct positive color photography. United States patent US 4,725,527. 1988 Feb 16. [Google Scholar]
10. Eikenberg LS, Vandre CR. Comparison of digital dental X-ray systems with self-developing film and manual processing for endodontic file length determination. Journal of endodontics. 2000;26(2):65-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
11. Sobouti F, Hadian H, Abdi S, Babaei Hatkehlouei M, Salimi N, Dadgar S. Radiographic Comparison of Apical Root Resorption During Orthodontic Treatment with Bracket Slot Size 0,018-inch and 0,022-inch. Gazi Medical Journal. 2018;29(3):223-6. [Google Scholar]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).