The Effect of Different Irrigant Activation Methods on Postoperative Pain After Endodontic Retreatment

Reem Habib, Wael H. Kamel, Nehal N Roshdy, Marwa Aboushadi
{"title":"The Effect of Different Irrigant Activation Methods on Postoperative Pain After Endodontic Retreatment","authors":"Reem Habib, Wael H. Kamel, Nehal N Roshdy, Marwa Aboushadi","doi":"10.54623/fdj.8022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: This study was designed to evaluate the effect of different irrigant activation methods on post operative pain after endodontic retreatment. Materials and Methods: seventy eight patients need non-surgical retreatment in mandibular first molar were involved in the study. The retreatment was performed in two visits, at first visit cases were randomly divided into three groups according to methods of irrigant activation after root canal retreatment with protaper next rotary ni-ti system. Group A (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) with manual dynamic agitation using master cone Group B (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) using ultrasonic machine (ultra-x) for 60 seconds. Group C (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) with NaviTip (29-gauge 27 mm) with double side tip. At second visit after one week, obturation was performed using modified single cone technique ans access cavity was filled with coronal restoration. After two visits root canal treatment and a specific method of agitation, depending on each group, the patients were given a questionnaire on which the patient would mark the degree of pain in a scale from 0 to 10 at 6, 12, 24, 48 72 hrs and one week post-obturation. Data were statistically analyzed with a significance level of P ≤0.05. Results: At 6,12,24 hrs., there was significant difference between the groups in pain intensity where control group C (Navitip with side vented needle) showed more pain scores than in the intervention groups (Ultra X and manual dynamic agitation). On the other hand, at 48, 72 hours and 7 days post- operative, there was no statistically significant difference in pain among tested groups. Conclusion: Agitation of the irrigation is reliable safe to clinican and effective as final step irrigation protocol with successful management of postoperative pain in retreatment cases. The intensity of postoperative pain decreased with time regardless of final irrigation protocol used.","PeriodicalId":100562,"journal":{"name":"Future Dental Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54623/fdj.8022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This study was designed to evaluate the effect of different irrigant activation methods on post operative pain after endodontic retreatment. Materials and Methods: seventy eight patients need non-surgical retreatment in mandibular first molar were involved in the study. The retreatment was performed in two visits, at first visit cases were randomly divided into three groups according to methods of irrigant activation after root canal retreatment with protaper next rotary ni-ti system. Group A (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) with manual dynamic agitation using master cone Group B (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) using ultrasonic machine (ultra-x) for 60 seconds. Group C (n=26) Root canals were irrigated using 2.6% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) with NaviTip (29-gauge 27 mm) with double side tip. At second visit after one week, obturation was performed using modified single cone technique ans access cavity was filled with coronal restoration. After two visits root canal treatment and a specific method of agitation, depending on each group, the patients were given a questionnaire on which the patient would mark the degree of pain in a scale from 0 to 10 at 6, 12, 24, 48 72 hrs and one week post-obturation. Data were statistically analyzed with a significance level of P ≤0.05. Results: At 6,12,24 hrs., there was significant difference between the groups in pain intensity where control group C (Navitip with side vented needle) showed more pain scores than in the intervention groups (Ultra X and manual dynamic agitation). On the other hand, at 48, 72 hours and 7 days post- operative, there was no statistically significant difference in pain among tested groups. Conclusion: Agitation of the irrigation is reliable safe to clinican and effective as final step irrigation protocol with successful management of postoperative pain in retreatment cases. The intensity of postoperative pain decreased with time regardless of final irrigation protocol used.
不同冲洗激活方式对根管再治疗术后疼痛的影响
目的:评价不同灌洗激活方式对根管再治疗术后疼痛的影响。材料与方法:对78例需要非手术治疗的下颌第一磨牙患者进行研究。再治疗分两次就诊,首次就诊病例根据protaper下一旋转镍钛系统根管再治疗后冲洗激活方式随机分为三组。A组(n=26)采用2.6%次氯酸钠(NaOCl)根管冲洗,采用主锥手动动态搅拌;B组(n=26)采用2.6%次氯酸钠(NaOCl)根管冲洗,超声机(ultra-x)超声冲洗60秒。C组(n=26)采用2.6%次氯酸钠(NaOCl)和NaviTip(29号27毫米)双端根管冲洗。一周后第二次就诊时,采用改良的单锥技术进行封闭,通道腔内填充冠状修复体。在两次根管治疗和特定的激动方法后,根据每组患者的情况,给患者一份调查问卷,患者将在充填后6、12、24、48、72小时和一周用0到10的等级标记疼痛程度。对数据进行统计学分析,P≤0.05为显著水平。结果:6、12、24小时。组间疼痛强度差异有统计学意义,其中C组(带侧通气针的Navitip)疼痛评分高于干预组(Ultra X和手动动态搅拌)。另一方面,在术后48、72小时和7天,实验组之间的疼痛无统计学差异。结论:搅拌冲洗是临床可靠、安全、有效的最后一步冲洗方案,可成功地控制再治疗病例的术后疼痛。无论最终采用何种冲洗方案,术后疼痛强度随时间的推移而降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信