Efficacy of Pediatric Rotary File System Versus Hand Instrumentation for Root Canal Preparation in Primary Teeth
NCT ID: NCT06152354
Last Updated: 2023-11-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-10-02
2023-10-18
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Control group (A):- included 20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by hand instrumentation system using K- File from size 15 to size 35.
Experimental Group (B):- included 20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by rotary system using Kedo-SG rotary file system according to manufacturer's instructions
Methods of Evaluation
Stage I :- During and after canal preparation:- The following parameters were evaluated for all cases in both groups:- A- The instrumentation and canal filling time were recorded for both groups using stopwatch. B- Radiographic assessment for filling were done immediately postoperative to record :-
1. Distance between the apex to filling level of the mesial and distal roots .
2. Obturation form
Stage II : Follow up :
The follow up were carried out by clinical and radiographic evaluation for all cases in both groups:-
The clinical evaluation were carried out at (0 base line = after 7 days ) then after 1 , 3 , 6 and 12 months .
Radiographic evaluation were performed immediately postoperative as (0 baseline ) after cementation of stainless steel crowns for assessment of filling quality. Radiographs will be used for comparison for consequent radiographs . Follow ups were performed after 6 and 12 months.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The teeth were randomly allocated in two equal groups :
Control group (A):- included 20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by hand instrumentation system using K- File from size 15 to size 35.
Experimental Group (B):- included 20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by rotary system using Kedo-SG rotary file system according to manufacturer's instructions
Clinical procedures :
1. Preoperative digital periapical radiograph were taken using standardized paralleling technique using XCP device .
2. Local anesthesia were administered to the patient.
3. The tooth were isolated using rubber dam .
4. Caries were removed by large spoon excavator.
5. The cavities were cleaned by thoroughly rinsing with chlorohexidine 0.2% .
6. Access cavity were done under constant water cooling and suction using high speed round bur No.330 .
7. Pulp chamber were completely deroofed .
8. No .10 size K file were used to determine patency of canals.
9. The working length were determined by apex locator \& periapical radiograph.
10. Depending on the group allocation , the canal instrumentation were done by step back technique using K- file (Mani ) from size 15 to size 35 in quarter pull turn motion apically or by crown down technique using Kedo-SG file rotary system using endodontic motor.
11 - After each instrumentation , the canal were irrigated by 1% sodium hypochlorite .
12- The canal were dried with paper points( #30 \#) 13- Then canal were filled with creamy mix of Zinc oxide \& Egenol. 14-Zinc phosphate cement were placed over Zinc oxide \& Egenol then finally restored by Stainless steel crown .
15-Postoperative digital periapical radiographs were taken using standardized paralleling technique using XCP device .
Methods of Evaluation
Stage I :- During and after canal preparation:- The following parameters were evaluated for all cases in both groups:- A- The instrumentation and canal filling time were recorded for both groups using stopwatch. B- Radiographic assessment for filling were done immediately postoperative to record :-
1. Distance between the apex to filling level of the mesial and distal roots .
2. Obturation form
Stage II : Follow up :
The follow up were carried out by clinical and radiographic evaluation for all cases in both groups:-
The clinical evaluation were carried out at (0 base line = after 7 days ) then after 1 , 3 , 6 and 12 months .
The following clinical criteria were evaluated: -
* Spontaneous pain as described by Oginin and Undoye ( 29)
* Sensitivity to percussion presence or absence.
* Tooth mobility presence or absence.
* Examination of any changes of the mucobuccal folds (presence or absence of swelling, sinus, draining fistula or abscess).
If the tooth exhibits any of above clinical features, the pulpectomy was considered a failure (F); otherwise, it was regarded as clinical success (S).
Radiographic evaluation were performed immediately postoperative as (0 baseline ) after cementation of stainless steel crowns for assessment of filling quality. Radiographs will be used for comparison for consequent radiographs . Follow ups were performed after 6 and 12 months.
The following radiographic criteria were evaluated :-
* Presence or absence of widening of apical periodontal membrane space .
* Presence or absence of furcation radioluency .
* Presence or absence of internal or external root resorption .
All patients were examined using standardized intra oral paralleling periapical direct digital radiographs using the rinn (XCP) periapical film holder and a long cone. Radiometric and radiodensitometric analysis of the radiographs were carried out using the software of Digora (2.5) system.
Dates of follow up visits were written on the patient 's recall card , parents were asked to call if any symptoms of pain or infection occurred at any time before recall visit .If there is any complications during follow up periods, different techniques of treatment were done according to the case.
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.
Control group
20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by hand instrumentation system using K- File from size 15 to size 35.
Manual files
instrumentation were done by step back technique using K- file (Mani ) from size 15 to size 35 in quarter pull turn motion apically
Experimental group
20 mandibular primary molars in which pulpectomy were performed by rotary system using Kedo-SG rotary file system according to manufacturer's instructions .
rotary system
crown down technique using Kedo-SG file rotary system using endodontic motor
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
rotary system
crown down technique using Kedo-SG file rotary system using endodontic motor
Manual files
instrumentation were done by step back technique using K- file (Mani ) from size 15 to size 35 in quarter pull turn motion apically
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Restorable lower primary molars.
* History of spontaneous pain or pain that is not relieved by analgesics.
* Pain with percussion
* Excessive bleeding from the root canals
Exclusion Criteria
* Acute or chronic abscess \& fistula.
* Inter-radicular or periapical bone destruction (radiolucency) as revealed in the preoperative periapical radiograph .
* Mobility grade III.
* Internal root resorption.
4 Years
6 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Suez Canal University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
faculty of dentistry Suez canal university
Ismailia, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
124/2018
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id