Root Canal Infection
Conditions
Brief summary
A hundred previously root canal treated asymptomatic single-rooted teeth with periapical lesions were treated in single versus multiple visit root canal retreatment. Half of the teeth were randomly assigned to the one-visit (OV) group. The other teeth were treated in two visits (TV). All patients were recalled and investigated clinically and radiographically for 24 months.
Detailed description
The aim of the study was to evaluate the radiographic evidence of periapical healing in previously root canal treated teeth with apical periodontitis treated in a single visit and to compare the results with conventional two-visit root canal treatment .100 asymptomatic single rooted teeth with periapical lesions were included. The root canal filling material was removed and reinstrumentation was performed using hand files with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) and 5% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as irrigants. Half of the teeth were randomly assigned to the one-visit (OV) group. The other teeth were treated in two visits (TV), after completion of root canal instrumentation calcium hydroxide paste was placed into the root canal and root canal obturation was performed in second visit. All patients were recalled and investigated clinically and radiographically for 24 months. Changes in apical bone density indicating radiographic healing were evaluated.
Interventions
OTHEROne visit root canal retreatment
The teeth were treated in one-visit (OV) root canal retreatment. Final root canal irrigation was performed with 5% EDTA, followed by 2.5% NaOCl and received an additional final rinse with 2% CHX before obturation
OTHERTwo visit root canal retreatment
The teeth were treated in two visit (TV) root canal retreatment. After completion of root canal instrumentation, calcium hydroxide (CH) paste was placed into the root canal. In second visit, all root canals were irrigated with 5% EDTA followed by 2.5% NaOCl before obturation.
Sponsors
Ege University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* with a non-contributory medical history, * single-rooted teeth with periapical lesions, * previously root canal treated but no reduction in the lesion after the treatment * diagnosed as asymptomatic apical periodontitis
Exclusion criteria
* clinical symptoms, drainage, * more than 5 mm loss of periodontal attachment, * non-restorable tooth
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The presence or absence of clinical symptoms in clinical examination | 24 months | All patients were called for follow up visits. The evaluation was performed by clinical examination. Clinical symptoms including presence of pain, tenderness to percussion and palpation, presence of sinus tract or swelling was detected and recorded as present or absent. If one of these symptoms recorded as present, it is considered as failure. If there is no symptom, it is considered as success. |
| The rate of radiographic healing of the periapical lesion. | 24 months | Follow-up visits were performed for all patients in order to evaluate radiographic status. Changes in apical bone density indicating radiographic healing was assessed using Periapical Index (PAI) (Orstavik 1986) as the scoring system. PAI 1 and 2 considered as healed, reduction in the PAI score was considered as healing and persistence or increased in the PAI score (PAI 4 or 5) was considered as failure. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The level of postoperative pain | 12hours-24hours and 48 hours | Postoperative pain after 12, 24 and 48 hours, 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). |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed