One-visit Root Canal Treatment Using Chlorhexidine as a Final Irrigant

Root Canal Infection Clinical Trial

Official title:

Comparison of One-visit Root Canal Treatment Using Chlorhexidine as a Final Irrigant and Conventional Two-visit Root Canal Treatment

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT05006209
• Other study ID #: one-visit root canal treatment
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: June 1, 2016
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2021

Study information

• Verified date: August 2021
• Source: Ege University
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

A hundred asymptomatic molar teeth with periapical lesions were treated in single versus multiple visit root canal treatment. Half of the teeth were randomly assigned to the one-visit (OV) group and received an additional final rinse with 2% CHX before obturation. The other teeth were treated in two visits (TV) with calcium hydroxide dressing. All patients were recalled and investigated clinically and radiographically for 48 months

Description:

The aim of the study was to evaluate the radiographic evidence of periapical healing in teeth with apical periodontitis treated in a single visit with an additional final irrigation using 2% chlorhexidine and to compare the results with conventional multiple-visit root canal treatment (RCT) with an intracanal calcium hydroxide dressing as a control group. 100 asymptomatic molar teeth with periapical lesions were treated using engine-driven nickel-titanium (NiTi) instrumentation 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 and received an additional final rinse with 2% chlorhexidine (CHX) before obturation. 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 48 months. Changes in apical bone density indicating radiographic healing were evaluated.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 100
• Est. completion date: April 1, 2021
• Est. primary completion date: January 1, 2021
• Accepts healthy volunteers: Accepts Healthy Volunteers
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• with a non-contributory medical history,

• mature molar teeth with periapical lesions,

• diagnosed as asymptomatic apical periodontitis

Exclusion Criteria:

• clinical symptoms, drainage,

• more than 5 mm loss of periodontal attachment,

• previous endodontic treatment,

• non-restorable tooth

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Root Canal Infection

Intervention

Other:
• One visit root canal treatment

• Two visit root canal treatment

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Ege University

References & Publications (3)

Miçoogullari Kurt S, Çaliskan MK. Efficacy of chlorhexidine as a final irrigant in one-visit root canal treatment: a prospective comparative study. Int Endod J. 2018 Oct;51(10):1069-1076. doi: 10.1111/iej.12931. Epub 2018 Apr 23. — View Citation

Paredes-Vieyra J, Enriquez FJ. Success rate of single- versus two-visit root canal treatment of teeth with apical periodontitis: a randomized controlled trial. J Endod. 2012 Sep;38(9):1164-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.05.021. Epub 2012 Jul 26. — View Citation

Siqueira JF Jr, Rôças IN. Optimising single-visit disinfection with supplementary approaches: a quest for predictability. Aust Endod J. 2011 Dec;37(3):92-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4477.2011.00334.x. Review. — View Citation

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Clinical healing according to presence of clinical symptoms	All patients were called for follow up visits. The clinical healing was determined by examining clinical symptoms including presence of pain, tenderness to percussion and palpation, presence of sinus tract or swelling, and mobility. If one of these symptoms occurs, it is considered as failure..	12 months
Primary	Clinical healing according to presence of clinical symptoms	All patients were called for follow up visits. The clinical healing was determined by examining clinical symptoms including presence of pain, tenderness to percussion and palpation, presence of sinus tract or swelling, and mobility.If one of these symptoms occurs, it is considered as failure..	24 months
Primary	Clinical healing according to presence of clinical symptoms	All patients were called for follow up visits. The clinical healing was determined by examining clinical symptoms including presence of pain, tenderness to percussion and palpation, presence of sinus tract or swelling, and mobility.If one of these symptoms occurs, it is considered as failure..	48 months
Primary	Changes in the size and the PAI score of the periapical lesion	The rate of radiographic healing of the periapical lesion. 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.	12 months
Primary	Changes in the size and the PAI score of the periapical lesion	The rate of radiographic healing of the periapical lesion. 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.	24 months
Primary	Changes in the size and the PAI score of the periapical lesion	The rate of radiographic healing of the periapical lesion. 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.	48 months