Success Rate of 4 Injection Protocols for Mandibular First Molars With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis
NCT ID: NCT04929522
Last Updated: 2021-10-07
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
160 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-01-01
2021-05-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Evaluation of Post Operative Pain and Success Rate After Pulpotomy
NCT04933955
The Effect of Intra-pulpal Anesthesia With Cryotherapy on Intra-operative Pain
NCT06194721
Effect of Apical Patency and Local Corticosteroid on Pain and Neuropeptides Release in Patients With Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial
NCT06457828
Effect of Submucosal Cryotherapy on Postoperative Endodontic Pain
NCT06090500
Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Mineral Trioxide Aggregate and Biodentine as Pulp Medicaments in Primary Molars
NCT05102318
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Allocation concealment mechanism: The sequentially generated numbers were placed in opaque envelopes until the intervention was conducted, and each participant was asked to select an envelope that determines which group of intervention was assumed.
Implementation: Co-researcher used computer generated randomization for participants who achieve eligibility criteria and accordingly participants were enrolled in either of the groups under study.
Blinding Both the participants, the operator who initiated endodontic treatment and monitored the pain, and the statistician were blinded to the anesthetic techniques used.
Intervention Diagnosis was confirmed through history reporting spontaneous pain, a moderate to severe painful response that persists after thermal stimulation, a prolonged response to cold testing with Endo-Ice (1,1,1,2 tetrafluoroethane; Hygenic Corp, Akron, OH), absence of percussion sensitivity and the periapical aspect of the tooth in the bidimensional periapical radiograph was normal. Matching vital contralateral teeth were also tested to ensure an accurate diagnosis and to serve as controls. To prevent bias, this diagnostic step was performed by one investigator (AH), while another investigator (DK) was responsible for administration of all anesthetic injections (DK), and a third investigator (SS) was responsible for root canal treatment procedures and pain recording. All investigators have a minimum of 12 years of clinical experience in endodontics.
One hundred and eighty-five patients consecutively visited were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-five patients were excluded for different reasons and the others (eighty-four female and seventy-six male patients) were allocated to the trial (Figure 1) and randomly assigned into 4 groups (n=40) as follows:
Group 1 (IANB): After determining the injection site and aspiration, 3.6ml of the anesthetic solution was administered using the standard inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB), this was considered the control group.
Group 2 (IANB + IO): A standard IANB was administered the same as for Group 1, followed by a supplemental intraosseous infusion (IO) injection using the Anesto system (W\&H Dentalwerk Bürmoos, Austria). To ensure comfort during the procedure, 0.1ml of anesthetic solution was infiltrated at the perforation site using the standard syringe. The perforation site was selected near the junction of the attached and unattached gingival tissues, immediately distal to the first molar. Perforation was accomplished by operating the Anesto handpiece at full speed, with constant moderate pressure maintained until the perforator was felt to 'drop' into the cancellous bone. 1.8mL of the anesthetic solution was then deposited over a 60-second period. The Anesto handpiece was again retracted and, with the perforator rotating, removed from the injection site.
Group 3 (IANB + PDL): A standard IANB was administered the same as for groups 1 and 3, followed by a supplemental periodontal ligament (PDL) injection. The needle was wedged with force into the PDL space between the tooth and the alveolar crest of the bone, at 30-degrees to the long axis of the tooth. The thumb and index fingers of the left hand supported the needle to prevent buckling. The handle of the syringe was squeezed firmly until backpressure was achieved. Then a total of 1.8ml of the anesthetic solution were injected mesially and distally to the treated molar.
Group 4 (IANB + BI): A standard IANB was administered the same as for groups 1, 2 and 3, followed by a supplemental buccal infiltration at the buccal side of the affected tooth. A total of 1.8ml of the anesthetic solution were injected halfway the mesiodistal width of the clinical crown.
IANB, PDL and BI injections were performed with a conventional dental syringe (indicate the brand) and a 27-G needle at a rate of 2 mL/min. The anesthetic solution used for all techniques was Articaine HCL 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline (Artinibsa, Inibsa, Barcelona, Spain). The efficacy of anesthesia was determined by the following: (1) confirmation of lip numbness, (2) negative response to Endo-Ice, (3) negative response to the maximum output of the electric pulp tester (Parkell, Edgewood, NY, USA).
Root canal treatment procedure was later initiated, and the patients were asked to rate their pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Pain was scored as follows: Score 0, no pain; Score 1, mild pain; Score 2, moderate pain; or Score 3, severe pain. After rubber dam placement and during caries removal, access preparation and pulpectomy, success of the anesthetic technique was determined by VAS. The technique was considered as a 'success' when the patient reported no pain (VAS = 0 or 1) and as a 'failure' otherwise (VAS \>1).
Heart rate changes were monitored with a finger pulse oximeter (Medlinket, Shenzhen Med-link Electronics, Shenzhen, China). It was recorded from 2 min before to 5 min after injection, at 30-s intervals. The mean heart rate for each injection was recorded.
Statistical analysis All analyses were undertaken with IBM SPSS Statistics (SPSS 26.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The anesthetic success rates were analyzed using the chi-square test. Age differences were analyzed using One Way ANOVA, gender differences were analyzed using the Fischer Exact test while heart rate changes were analysed with Kruskal Wallis test, being non-normally distributed. Statistically significant differences were set at the P \< 0.05 level
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
IANB/inferior alveolar nerve block
patients will be given standard IANB with 3.6 ml Articaine HCL 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline (Artinibsa, Inibsa, Barcelona, Spain).
local anesthesia
technique for local anesthesia
IANB+IO
patients will be given standard IANB plus an intra-osseous with 3.6 ml Articaine HCL 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline (Artinibsa, Inibsa, Barcelona, Spain).
local anesthesia
technique for local anesthesia
IANB+PDL
patients will be given standard IANB plus a PDL injection with 3.6 ml Articaine HCL 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline (Artinibsa, Inibsa, Barcelona, Spain).
local anesthesia
technique for local anesthesia
IANB+BI
patients will be given standard IANB plus a BI injection with 3.6 ml Articaine HCL 4% with 1:100,000 adrenaline (Artinibsa, Inibsa, Barcelona, Spain).
local anesthesia
technique for local anesthesia
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
local anesthesia
technique for local anesthesia
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* (Category: American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1)
* aged 21-49 years
* with no physical disability, facial paresthesia or psychological problems
* presenting with a single vital mature mandibular first molar, with signs and/or symptoms of symptomatic irreversible pulpitis
Exclusion Criteria
* patients who took analgesics or other medications that would alter the inflammatory response of the pulp or provide analgesia 6- hours pre-operatively
* those with known sensitivity to the pharmaceuticals used in this trial.
* those with pathological periodontal pockets
21 Years
49 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ain Shams University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Shehab El Din Mohamed Saber
Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Ahmed Abdel Rahman Hashem
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Ain Shams University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Ain Shams University
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
FDASU-REC IM061101
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.