ArticleCureus2023
Incidence and Intensity of Pain Following Endodontic Treatment by Different Instrumentation Techniques in Teeth With Periapical Lesion.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIM AND
objectivesThis study was carried out to compare the effectiveness of hand and rotary instrumentation techniques on postoperative pain in asymptomatic necrotic premolars with periapical lesions and instrumented by a modified step-back technique using a K file, crown down by continuous rotary motion technique using ProTaper Universal (Dentsply Mailefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and with the reciprocation technique using WaveOne (Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA). MATERIALS AND
methodsFor this study, 66 premolars with single roots and canals were chosen. The procedure was completed in a single visit. Following access opening, the working length was initially determined using an apex locator and then confirmed after inserting K file #10 by radiograph. The canal was cleaned and shaped using a grouping system. After the master apical preparation, the canal was dried by paper point and obturated with gutta-percha and AH plus sealer, an epoxide-amine resin pulp canal sealer. In order to confirm the obturation, a radiograph was taken. After that, a permanent restoration material was used to seal the access cavity. Following that, patients to whom the visual analog scale (VAS) had already been explained were contacted by phone at six, 12, 24, and 48 hours.
resultsIn this study, compared to a stainless steel instrumentation technique, WaveOne instrumentation caused more noticeable pain. The results of the current study showed that, on average, postoperative pain scores decreased over the course of the 12 to 48-hour period, reaching a minimum or a maximum at 48 hours (p<0.01).
conclusionPostoperative pain was produced by all instrumentation methods used in the study. In comparison to ProTaper and WaveOne, instrumentation using the modified step-back technique with K files caused less pain, especially over the course of a 24-hour period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.