ArticleJournal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry
Endodontic Length Measurements Using Different Modalities: An
Article in Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community Dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of working length determination using endodontic motors with integrated electronic apex locators: anFrontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- A reproducible optical-microscopic framework for evaluating electronic apex locator performance in different irrigants using 3D-printed transparent resin teeth.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Article
- Root canal length estimated by cone-beam computed tomography at different slice thicknesses, dedicated endodontic software, or measured by an electronic apex locator.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Endodontic length measurements using cone beam computed tomography with dedicated or conventional software at different voxel sizes.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to investigate and compare the accuracy of the 3D Endo software, conventional CBCT software Romexis Viewer, and the EAL E-Pex Pro in WL determination. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree hundred and two root canals in 110 intact human extracted molars were accessed. The actual lengths (ALs) were measured. Root canal lengths were measured using 3D Endo with proposed length (3D-PL) by software, correct length (3D-CL), Romexis Viewer, and the E-Pex Pro. The percentages of the measurements in the range of ±0.5 mm to the AL were compared using the Fisher's exact test. The paired
resultsThe accuracies in the range of ±0.5 mm to the AL were 83.8%, 86.7%, 48.3%, and 99.7% for 3D-PL, 3D-CL, Romexis Viewer, and E-PexPro, respectively. There were agreements between 3D-PL and Romexis Viewer with the AL measurements.
conclusionThe CBCT measurements using 3D Endo with the proposed length by the software and Romexis Viewer with the voxel size of 0.15 mm agreed with the AL measurements of the root canals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.