Accuracy of different electronic apex locators in determination of minimum root perforation diameter

Objective: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the detection of minimum root canal perforation diameter with Raypex 6 (VDW, Munich, Germany), Propex Pixi (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) Dentaport ZX (J. Morita, Irvine, California, USA), Apex ID (SybronEndo, Orange, CA, USA), Propex II (PRO; Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), Dr's Finder NEO (Good Doctors, Incheon, Korea) electronic apex locators (EALs). Materials and Methods: One-hundred extracted, single-rooted human teeth were artificially perforated using burs with 5 different diameters (1.25 mm, 1.0 mm, 0.75 mm, 0.5 mm, 0.25 mm) in 5 mm above the apex. Each group consisted of 20 teeth. The actual canal lengths (AL) up to the perforation site were measured, and then the teeth were embedded in an alginate mold. Perforations were electronically measured using a size 40 K-file by each EAL. For each tooth, AL was subtracted from the electronic canal length (EL) of the perforation. Statistical analyses were performed using Two-way Anova test at a significance level of 0.05. Results: There was no significant difference among all EALs used in this study at 1.25 and 1.00 mm perforation diameters (p> .05). A significant difference was found between Propex pixi and Dentaport ZX in teeth with a perforation diameter of 0.75 mm (p <.05). Conclusion: Although all EALs tested could not detect the perforations for diameters of 0.5 mm and 0.25 mm, they were highly successful in determination of simulated root perforations for diameters of 1.25 mm, 1 mm, 0.75 mm. *Keywords: Electronic apex locator, perforation, root canal.