NCT04454814|CompletedDMC
Postoperative Pain After Root Canal Preparation Using Different Engine-driven Systems
Postoperative Pain Incidence of Asymptomatic Mandibular Molar Teeth After Using Different Engine-driven Systems
Loading search results
Postoperative Pain Incidence of Asymptomatic Mandibular Molar Teeth After Using Different Engine-driven Systems
Sponsor study identifier
interventional
120
1 country
1
Study Start
October 15, 2017
Actual (reported)Primary Completion
January 15, 2020
Actual (reported)Study Completion
February 15, 2020
Actual (reported)A hundred twenty patients who had an asymptomatic mandibular molar teeth with periapical lesion were included. For each patient, teeth were prepared with Reciproc Blue or Protaper Universal instruments. Each tooth was obturated with gutta-percha and resin-based sealer using single cone technique for mesial roots and for distal roots single cone and cold lateral compaction technique. Root canal treatment was performed in a single visit. Postoperative pain was assessed as no, mild, moderate, or severe at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 hours and 7 days after obturation.
Registry-reported information. Elapsed time and enrollment totals alone do not measure study progress or recruitment pace.
February 15, 2020
Actual (reported)Click on a node to explore related trials.
Some registry-reported names shown below are not yet linked in this graph.
Dates and qualifiers reported by the registry. Estimated dates do not confirm that a milestone has occurred.
October 15, 2017
Actual (reported)January 15, 2020
Actual (reported)February 15, 2020
Actual (reported)June 26, 2020
Actual (reported)July 2, 2020
Actual (reported)The incidence of postoperative pain
Postoperative pain after 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 hours and 7 days after obturation was measured using a modified 4-grade visual analogue scale (VAS) ranging from 1(no pain), 2(mild pain), 3 (moderate pain/pain relieved by analgesics), to (4) severe pain.
6-hour to 7-day
The instrumentation protocol with Protaper Universal rotary files was began with an S1 file with a brushing movement to the two thirds of the working length and then an SX file was introduced to the two thirds of the working length with a brushing movement Afterwards, S1, S2, F1, F2 files in mesial roots and F4 files in distal roots were used to the working length, respectively. Protaper F2 instrument was then used to complete the canal preparation in mesial roots and Protaper F4 instrument was used to complete the canal preparation in distal roots.
The instrumentation of the root canal in the Reciproc Blue group began with a R25 instrument with a slow in-and-out pecking movement.According to the manufacturer instructions, a #10 K-file was inserted to the canal to check the canal is free to 1 mm beyond the prepared canal section. After each 3 pecks or when a resistance was encountered the instrument was pulled out of the canal. Afterward, the R25 instrument was inserted in to root canal until approximately two thirds of the working length.RB R25 instrument was then used to complete the canal preparation in mesial roots and RB R40 instrument was used to complete the canal preparation in distal roots.
Root canal treatment using Protaper Universal instruments
Root canal treatment using Reciproc Blue instruments
Registry-reported names are shown in full. Names without a link have not yet been matched to a Syfrah profile.
Gözde Kandemir Demirci
Izmir, 35100, Turkey (Türkiye)
Mollashahi NF, Saberi EA, Havaei SR, Sabeti M. Comparison of Postoperative Pain after Root Canal Preparation with Two Reciprocating and Rotary Single-File Systems: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Iran Endod J. 2017 Winter;12(1):15-19. doi: 10.22037/iej.2017.03.
Shokraneh A, Ajami M, Farhadi N, Hosseini M, Rohani B. Postoperative endodontic pain of three different instrumentation techniques in asymptomatic necrotic mandibular molars with periapical lesion: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 Jan;21(1):413-418. doi: 10.1007/s00784-016-1807-2. Epub 2016 Apr 4.
Gözde Kandemir Demirci
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
Seniha Miçooğulları Kurt
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
Burcu Serefoglu
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
Mehmet E Kaval
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
120 participants (actual enrollment reported by the registry).
First Submitted
June 26, 2020
First Posted
July 2, 2020
Study Start
October 15, 2017
Actual (reported)Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Kherlakian D, Cunha RS, Ehrhardt IC, Zuolo ML, Kishen A, da Silveira Bueno CE. Comparison of the Incidence of Postoperative Pain after Using 2 Reciprocating Systems and a Continuous Rotary System: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial. J Endod. 2016 Feb;42(2):171-6. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.011. Epub 2015 Nov 29.
Gambarini G, Sudani DA, Carlo SD, Pompa G, Pacifici A, Pacifici L, Testarelli L (2013) Incidence and intensivity of postoperative pain and periapical inflammation after endodontic treatment with two different instrumentation techniques. European Journal of Inflammation. 10, 99-103.
Mehmet K Çalışkan
Ege University Faculty of Dentistry
Primary Completion
January 15, 2020
Actual (reported)Study Completion
February 15, 2020
Actual (reported)Last Updated
July 2, 2020
Record last verified: 2020-06
Download the complete ClinicalTrials.gov record imported by Syfrah, including fields not shown in this page. The registry may contain a newer revision.
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov.
JSON downloads include source attribution and retrieval details alongside the unchanged original record or the separately normalized values.
Source retrieved: