Skip to content

Comparison Between M-Pro and ProTaper Next

Comparison of Postoperative Pain After Root Canal Instrumentation Using M-Pro and ProTaper Next in Molars With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03692039
Enrollment
50
Registered
2018-10-02
Start date
2018-10-01
Completion date
2019-10-01
Last updated
2020-07-14

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis

Brief summary

Comparing the postoperative pain resulting after mechanical instrumentation using M-pro files versus that resulting after using ProTaper Next rotary files in lower molar with symptomatic Irreversible pulpitis molars.

Detailed description

Lower molars with symptomatic Irreversible pulpitis molars are selected according to the eligibility and exclusion criteria and patients are then randomized to receive treatment either using M-pro Files or ProTaper Next files. Postoperative pain is then assessed using the Numerical Rating scale 6, 12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post-operatively . After completing the treatment, patients will instructed to take placebo if they feel pain and will be asked to provide the quantity of placebo intake until 72 hrs. In case of pain not relieved by placebo, after recording the amount of pain, the patient will be instructed to take an alternative line of pain control (Ibuprofen 400mg tablets every 6 hours). The amount and frequency of Ibuprofen intake will be recorded.

Interventions

PROCEDUREM-pro files in rotating motion

An endodontic file that has controlled memory properties

PROCEDUREProTaper Next files in rotating motion

An endodontic file that has an off center mass of rotation

Sponsors

Cairo University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Masking description

After the operator find an eligible participant, a phone call is made to the assistant supervisor to confirm the patient eligibility then to assign the participant to either group according to the generated random sequence.

Intervention model description

Blocks of 4 are generated on a Microsoft Excel sheet where the intervention and control are denoted A & B and randomly distributed. The table is kept with the assistant supervisor.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 45 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* 1- Males or Females. * 2- Mandibular molar teeth with: * Pre-operative sharp pain. * Vital response of pulp tissue to cold pulp tester (ethyl chloride spray). * Normal periapical radiographic appearance or slight widening in lamina dura using periapical index (PAI) score 1 as normal periapical structures or 2 as small changes in bone structures.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients having significant systemic disorders. * Patients who are allergic to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. * Patients with two or more adjacent teeth requiring root canal therapy. * Teeth that have: * Necrotic pulp tissues. * Association with swelling or fistulous tract. * Acute or chronic peri-apical abscess. * Greater than grade I mobility. * Pocket depth greater than 5mm. * No possible restorability. * Previous endodontic treatment.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Post operative pain assessed with numerical rating scaleUp to 72 hours post-operatively0 (none) to 10 (severe) Numerical Pain Rating Scale up to 72 hours post-operatively

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Incidence of placebo intake assessed by questioningUp to 72 hours post-operativelyAmount of placebo intake up to 72 hours post-operatively
Amount of analgesic intake assessed by countingUp to 72 hours post-operativelyNumber of analgesic tablets up to 72 hours post-operatively

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026