Comparison of Different Irrigation Activation Techniques on Postoperative Pain After Endodontic Treatment

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT04262245

Enrollment

100

Registered

2020-02-10

Start date

2017-01-05

Completion date

2019-09-14

Last updated

2020-02-10

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

Conditions

Postoperative Pain

Brief summary

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of different irrigation activation methods on postoperative pain using visual analog scale (VAS) using Xp-endo Finisher, EndoActivator and Passive ultrasonic irrigation activation techniques with traditional irrigation method. In this study, Traditional Irrigation (GI), Xp-endo Finisher (XPF), Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI), EndoActivator (EA) techniques will be used for irrigation activation. Twenty-five maxillary or mandibular single root and canal-shaped nonvital teeth will used in each group. Root canals will be prepared with TF-Adaptive system. Four different activation techniques will be applied during final irrigation. The canal treatments will be completed in one stage and postoperative pain analysis will be taken with VAS (Visual Analog Scale) scale after 12-24-48 hours. Statistical analysis will be performed with Mann Whitney-U test.

Detailed description

Vaious irrigation activation techniques have been used endodontic practice. These techniques are used to improve the activity of solutions. The selected techniques in this study are accepted as efficient methods for activation. However, postoperative pan is an important issue for clinicians. Thus, Traditional Irrigation (GI), Xp-endo Finisher (XPF), Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation (PUI), EndoActivator (EA) techniques will be used for irrigation activation. All techniques remove hard and soft tissue remnants successfully. The clinician expect to eliminate the postoperative pain. Therefore, a possible increase in pain due to activation technique may limit the use of these methods. The pain scores will be measured using the scale and statistically analyzed.

Interventions

PROCEDURETraditional Irrigation

irrigation with syringe

DEVICEXp-endo Finisher (XPF)

irrigation activation file

DEVICEPassive Ultrasonic Irrigation

irrigation activation method

DEVICEEndoActivator

irrigation activation method

Study design

Allocation

Intervention model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to 65 Years

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* nonvital tooth * single rooted tooth

Exclusion criteria

* tooth not requiring root canal treatment * patients under 18 years old * vital tooth * tooth having more than 1 canal

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Incidence of postoperative after endodontic treatment	0-48 hours	The incidence and severity of pain will be evaluated by using visual analog scale (VAS). The severity of pain varies between 0 to 10, in which 0 means no pain, whislt 10 means unbearable pain.

Countries

Turkey (Türkiye)

Outcome results

None listed

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