Evidence Hub

A novel noninvasive radiographic working length determination method – A randomized controlled clinical trial

Joseph Minu, A. Susila, A. K. Veronica

Endodontology, 2026

115 participants

Abstract

This randomized controlled clinical trial compared a novel, noninvasive radiographic method with a fourth-generation electronic apex locator (EAL) for working length determination.

A geometric technique using the law of symmetric triangles was piloted on extracted teeth and applied clinically with a custom sensor holder and digital protractor to standardize angulation. The trial followed Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2025 Guidelines (CTRI/2020/01/022629). A total of 208 root canals from 64 adult patients were randomly assigned into two groups: Digital radiographic (DR) method (

n

= 93 canals, 30 patients) and EAL (Root ZX Mini;

n

= 115 canals, 34 patients). The primary outcome was radiographic master cone fit within ± 2 mm of the apex. The secondary outcomes included obturation length, postoperative symptoms, and lesion healing using the Periapical Index at a 3-month follow-up. Analysis was performed using the SPSS v23.0 (

P

< 0.05).

Underestimation was significantly lower in the EAL group (1.7%) than in the DR group (15.1%) (

P

= 0.0001). Both showed adequate master cone and obturation lengths, with a single overestimation in the DR group (1.07%,

P

= 0.447). EAL had higher accuracy (61.7%,

P

= 0.0001), while DR achieved a greater mean lesion size reduction (77% vs. 23%,

P

= 0.04).

Digital radiography showed a similar tendency to underestimate working length as the EAL, with a comparable need for correction. However, it yielded accurate measurements in only…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 115 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free