ReviewThe Saudi dental journal2026
TruNatomy versus protaper gold for postoperative pain in pulpitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in The Saudi dental journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Root canal treatment aims to eliminate organisms within the canal system through the removal of pulp tissue, infected dentin, and necrotic materials. However, experiencing pain or swelling after root canal operations can be a significant concern. Minimally invasive (MI) techniques, such as the TruNatomy rotary file system, are intended to preserve tooth structure. However, conventional systems, such as ProTaper Gold rotary file system, aim for complete debridement. In this meta-analysis, we aim to assess the efficacy of the TruNatomy and ProTaper Gold in reducing postoperative pain. In November 2025, we conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TruNatomy to ProTaper Gold in adult patients with pulpitis. For the meta-analysis, we used R 4.5.0 with R Studio 2024.12.1 + 563. Using a random-effects model, we evaluated dichotomous data using risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI); whereas continuous data were analyzed using standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. Visual inspection of the forest plot was used to determine statistical heterogeneity between trials, in addition to I-squared (I2) and chi-squared (Chi2) statistics. Our analysis included four RCTs comprising 381 patients. Pooled analysis showed no statistically significant difference between TruNatomy and ProTaper Gold in pain intensity at 24 h (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI -0.17; 0.23), 48 h (SMD = 0.13, 95% CI -0.16; 0.42), or 72 h (SMD = -0.59, 95% CI -1.33; 0.14). There was no significant difference between the two groups in analgesic intake (RR = 1.2, 95% CI 0.70; 2.06). Also, the presence of postoperative pain at 24 and 48 h was similar in both groups. The results showed low statistical heterogeneity for most outcomes; however, the results should be interpreted with consideration of the clinical variability between the included studies. According to our data, the TruNatomy showed no superiority over ProTaper Gold rotary file systems in managing postoperative pain following root canal therapy. The choice of either approach may be based on other criteria, such as dentin preservation or operator preference. Thus, future large-scale clinical trials should validate these findings.
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.