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
70 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-08-19
2025-04-07
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Study Design / Methodology This study is designed as a prospective, single-center, randomized clinical trial with parallel group design.
A total of 70 patients who require root canal treatment in maxillary first molars will be included in the study. Patients will be randomly assigned to seven experimental groups (n=10 per group) according to the cleaning technique used after root canal obturation with AH Plus epoxy resin-based sealer.
The cleaning protocols will be:
1. Dry cotton pellet (control group)
2. Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet (7 sec)
3. Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet (visibly clean)
4. Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet + air polishing
5. Ethanol-saturated microbrush (7 sec)
6. Ethanol-saturated microbrush (visibly clean)
7. Air abrasion Standard root canal treatment procedures will be performed in all groups using rotary instrumentation and cold lateral condensation technique for obturation.
The cleaning effectiveness will be evaluated using standardized high-resolution macro photographs taken before and after the cleaning procedures. The sealer-covered area (SCA) will be calculated using image analysis software (Adobe Photoshop) based on pixel analysis.
The primary outcome of the study is the percentage reduction of SCA after cleaning procedures.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Study to Compare Various Root Canal Cleaning Devices Based on Cavitation,Ultrasonic and Conventional Methods.
NCT06005545
Effectiveness of Different Obturation Techniques
NCT06226740
The Effect of Instrumentation and Obturation on Postoperative Pain in Retreatment
NCT04789343
Measuring Apical Debris Extrusion With a Novel Laboratory Technique
NCT07341451
Effect of Different Apex Locators on Postoperative Pain in Endodontic Retreatment of Single-Rooted Teeth: Prospective Randomized Clinical Study
NCT06964490
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Sample size Power analysis was performed using G\*Power software (Version XX, University of Düsseldorf, Germany). In the absence of available clinical data in the literature, the sample size calculation was based on the findings of a pilot study. With an effect size of 0.8 and an alpha error probability of 0.05, the power of the study was estimated to exceed 80%, and the total sample size was determined as 35.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria Systemically healthy patients aged between 18 and 65 years who required routine root canal treatment in maxillary first molars were included in the study. Additional inclusion criteria were as follows: patients with sufficient cognitive ability to understand and provide informed consent, teeth undergoing primary root canal treatment, and cases in which the use of an AH Plus epoxy resin-based sealer was deemed appropriate. Exclusion criteria were as follows: teeth with a history of previous root canal treatment; patients with systemic diseases, known allergies, or pregnancy; patients who refused to participate or did not provide informed consent; teeth with unclear visualization of the cavity floor; and cases in which the access cavity design or cleaning protocol could not be standardized.
Randomization and allocation concealment Patients were randomly assigned to seven experimental groups using a computer-generated random sequence (www.randomizer.org). The allocation sequence was prepared by an independent researcher who was not involved in the treatment procedures. Group assignment was concealed in sealed opaque envelopes and revealed immediately before the intervention.
Root canal treatment protocol All root canal treatments were performed by a single endodontist with more than five years of clinical experience. Local anaesthesia was administered using 2% articaine with 1:100,000 epinephrine (Ultracaine D-S Forte, Hoechst Marion Roussel, Germany). Following rubber dam isolation, standard access cavities were prepared using high-speed diamond burs under water cooling. All procedures were carried out under dental magnification with 5.7× loupes (ExamVision, Denmark). Working length was determined using an electronic apex locator (Root ZX II, Morita, Tokyo, Japan) and confirmed radiographically. Root canal instrumentation was performed using a rotary NiTi system (FKG Dentaire, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland) in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. Irrigation was performed using 2.5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) throughout the instrumentation. Final irrigation was performed using 5 mL of 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) for 1 minute, followed by a final flush with 5 mL of distilled water. Ultrasonic activation of the irrigants was applied during the final irrigation phase using an ultrasonic unit (Piezon Master 700, EMS, Nyon, Switzerland) to enhance the removal of debris and smear layer. After drying the canals with sterile paper points, root canal obturation was performed using the cold lateral condensation technique with gutta-percha cones and an epoxy resin-based sealer (AH Plus, Dentsply DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany). The sealer was applied to the canal walls using the master cone. Following obturation, the excess gutta-percha was removed with a heated instrument at the canal orifice level, and vertical compaction was applied. All treatments were performed following a standardized protocol to minimize operator-dependent variability and ensure consistency across all cases.
Cleaning Protocol Seven different cleaning methods were performed to remove the sealer-contaminated dentine.
* Dry cotton pellet group: The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a dry cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed (previous studies: Ulusoy et al. 2016; da Silva et al. 2020).
* Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet 7 seconds group: The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet for 7 seconds (Ulusoy et al. 2016; da Silva et al. 2020).
* Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet visibly clean group: The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
* Ethanol-saturated cotton Pellet + air polishing group: After the contaminated dentine surface scrubbing with an 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed, air polishing was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Sodium bicarbonate powder (Velopex) was applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
* Microbrush 7 sec group: The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush for 7 seconds (Ulusoy et al. 2016).
* Microbrush visibly clean group: The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
* Air abrasion group: Air abrasion was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Aluminium oxide particles (53 µm, Velopex) were applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Following all cleaning procedures, an air/water spray was applied to the cavity surface to remove any remaining particles or cleaning agents.
Assessment Protocol The cleaning effectiveness at the cavity floor was assessed using standardized macro photographs of the cavity surfaces. Standardized photographs were taken immediately after the root canal obturation (pre-cleaning) and repeated following the completion of the cleaning procedures (post-cleaning). All images were captured using a digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera (Nikon D750, Nikon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) equipped with a 105 mm macro lens (AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105 mm f/2.8G IF-ED, Nikon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) and a paraflash lighting system (Visico, China) to ensure optimal standardization and illumination conditions. The shooting parameters were set at shutter speed 1/125, aperture f/2.8, ISO 200.
The measurements were performed by a single experienced researcher who was blinded to the cleaning protocols applied to the specimens. The photographs were quantitatively analyzed using image analysis software (Photoshop CC, Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).
In the software, the cavity floor surface areas were selected using the quick selection tool, and the number of pixels corresponding to the residual sealer was calculated. The number of pixels within the encircled area was determined using the histogram tool. The ratio of the sealer-contaminated area to the total cavity floor area was determined and recorded as a percentage for each specimen (Figure X). To ensure measurement reliability, the assessment was repeated three times for each image, and all measurements were recorded.
Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (Version XX, IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Initially, the normality of data distribution was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. For the comparison of the initial and remaining sealer percentages within each group, the Student's t-test was performed. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the removed sealer percentages among the groups. When a significant difference was detected, pairwise comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. A p-value of \<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
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
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
• Dry cotton pellet group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a dry cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed
Dry cotton pellet group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a dry cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet 7 seconds group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet for 7 seconds
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet 7 seconds group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet for 7 seconds
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Ethanol-saturated cotton Pellet + air polishing group
After the contaminated dentine surface scrubbing with an 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed, air polishing was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Sodium bicarbonate powder (Velopex) was applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Ethanol-saturated cotton Pellet + air polishing group
After the contaminated dentine surface scrubbing with an 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed, air polishing was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Sodium bicarbonate powder (Velopex) was applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Microbrush 7 sec group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush for 7 seconds
Microbrush 7 sec group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush for 7 seconds
Microbrush visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Microbrush visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Air abrasion group
Air abrasion was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Aluminium oxide particles (53 µm, Velopex) were applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Air abrasion group
Air abrasion was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Aluminium oxide particles (53 µm, Velopex) were applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Dry cotton pellet group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a dry cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet 7 seconds group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet for 7 seconds
Ethanol-saturated cotton pellet visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Ethanol-saturated cotton Pellet + air polishing group
After the contaminated dentine surface scrubbing with an 70% ethanol-saturated cotton pellet until no visible sealer remnants were observed, air polishing was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Sodium bicarbonate powder (Velopex) was applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Microbrush 7 sec group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush for 7 seconds
Microbrush visibly clean group
The contaminated dentine surface was scrubbed with a 70% ethanol-saturated microbrush until no visible sealer remnants were observed.
Air abrasion group
Air abrasion was performed for 10 seconds using the AquaCare Twin device (Velopex, UK). Aluminium oxide particles (53 µm, Velopex) were applied at a pressure of 2 bar, with a medium media flow and 17.5% ethanol-saturated solution (AquaSol, Velopex). The standard tip was positioned approximately 5 mm from the dentin surface and moved in a vertical (up-and-down) direction during the procedure. The application time and parameters were determined in consultation with the manufacturer due to the lack of previous clinical studies using the AquaCare device for this purpose.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Patients requiring routine root canal treatment in maxillary first molars
Patients with sufficient cognitive ability to understand and provide informed consent
Teeth undergoing primary root canal treatment
Cases in which the use of an AH Plus epoxy resin-based sealer was deemed appropriate
Exclusion Criteria
Patients with systemic diseases, known allergies, or pregnancy
Patients who refused to participate or did not provide informed consent
Teeth with unclear visualization of the cavity floor
Cases in which the access cavity design or cleaning protocol could not be standardized
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Marmara University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
ayse karadayi, asst. prof.
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
marmara university faculty of dentistry
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University
Istanbul, Kadıköy, Turkey (Türkiye)
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.
2024/22/983
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.