ReviewJournal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine2026
Effect of rotary and reciprocating instrumentation kinematics on postoperative pain following endodontic retreatment: a systematic review.
Review in Journal of dental anesthesia and pain medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review aimed to systematically evaluate whether rotary or reciprocating nickel-titanium instrumentation systems influence postoperative pain after nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines and prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261325110). A comprehensive electronic search was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Randomized clinical trials comparing rotary and reciprocating systems for nonsurgical endodontic retreatment and reporting postoperative pain outcomes were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Cochrane RoB-2 tool. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, a qualitative synthesis was performed. A total of 194 records were identified through a database search, and five randomized clinical trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Most studies reported no statistically significant differences in the incidence or intensity of postoperative pain between the rotary and reciprocating retreatment systems at 24, 48, and 72 h. However, one randomized clinical trial reported significantly higher early postoperative pain associated with the reciprocating system than with the rotary system during the initial postoperative period, whereas no significant difference was observed at longer follow-up intervals. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were observed between the rotary and reciprocating kinematics regarding analgesic intake following the retreatment procedures. Based on available randomized evidence, rotary and reciprocating instrumentation systems appear to produce comparable postoperative pain following nonsurgical endodontic retreatment. Postoperative discomfort is generally mild, decreases over time, and does not demonstrate a consistent dependence on instrumentation kinematics.
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.