Effect of Apical Third Enlargement to Different Taper and Master Apical Preparation Size on Periapical Healing and Postoperative Pain After Primary Single Sitting Non Surgical Root Canal Treatment

NCT ID: NCT07166679

Last Updated: 2025-09-10

Study Results

Results pending

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.

Recruitment Status

RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

270 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-04-18

Study Completion Date

2027-04-18

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

To Determine Effect Of Apical Third enlargement To Different Taper And Master Apical Preparation Size On Periapical Healing And Postoperative Pain After Primary Single Sitting Non Surgical Root Canal Treatment : A Randomized Clinical Trial

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The primary goal of endodontic therapy is to eradicate microbial infection within the root canal system and prevent reinfection. Thorough debridement and disinfection of the apical third are crucial, as this region serves as a reservoir for residual microorganisms.

Till date, only four clinical trials have analysed the effect of apical canal preparation size on treatment outcomes. Out of the four clinical trials one retrospective in nature, Hoskinson study no improvement in radiographic and clinical outcome with an increase in the master apical file .

Souza (2012) conducted clinical trial in necrotic pulp and concluded that apical third enlargement does not alter endodontic treatment outcomes.

Saini (2012) stated that enlarging the canal three sizes beyond the first apical binding file is sufficient.

Fatima (2021) found that preparing the apical region in two sizes larger the initial apical binding file (IABF) with a 4% taper is inadequate, leading to significantly lower success rates compared to larger preparation sizes and greater tapers .

In both studies( Fatima and saini ) determination of apical enlargement size was based on the IABF (initial apical binding file). There was no mention of master apical size in different groups. Also the taper of apical one third was different in both these studies.Both master apical size and preparation taper can influence root canal shaping in apical third Various in-vitro studies suggest that increasing the taper has no significant effect on bacterial reduction.

According to Plotino(2014) the difference in the taper of the instruments did not result in different levels of disinfection in the apical region. They observed that amount of infected residual dentin \& the smear layer in the apical third of root canals were not significantly affected by preparations with 0.04 or 0.06 tapers when the apical diameter remained the same. Other studies examining bacterial reduction and different tapers agree with these results (Alimadadi, 2021; Usta 2023).

There is no impact on bacteria reduction when using different tapers with the same apical size #25 in the preparation of the mesial root canals of mandibular molars. ( Macedo, 2024) while clinical study by Fatima suggests that increasing the taper promotes better periapical healing. In Fatima study, a significantly high success rate was observed with apical preparation 2 sizes larger than the IABF and a 6% taper compared with the same preparation size with a 4%taper (92.8% vs 57.1%.).Till date there is no clinical study that combined the effect of different master apical file size and different taper on outcome of primary nonsurgical root canal treatment. Therefore, the present study was designed as a randomized clinical trial to examine the effect of apical third enlargement to different taper and master apical preparation size on periapical healing and postoperative pain after primary single sitting non surgical root canal treatment

Primary objective :

To evaluate and compare the radiographic outcome of periapical healing after primary non surgical single sitting root canal with different tapers and different master apical file size

Secondary objective :

To assess the post operative pain using VAS scale, postoperatively every 24 hours for 1 week after primary nonsurgical single sitting root canal treatment.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Asymptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

GROUP A HAVING MASTER APICAL FILE SIZE # 25

group a is further dived into 3 further subgroup a1 2% taper a2 4% taper a3 6% taper

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

root canal treatment with 2% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 2%taper

root canal treatment with 4% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 4 %taper

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

GROUP B HAVING MASTER APICAL FILE SIZE # 30

GROUP B is further divide into 3 further subgroup b1 2% taper b2 4 % taper b3 6 % taper

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

root canal treatment with 2% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 2%taper

root canal treatment with 4% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 4 %taper

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

GROUP C HAVING MASTER APICAL FILE SIZE # 35

GROUP C is further divide into 3 subgroups c1 2 % taper c2 4 % taper c3 6 % taper

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

root canal treatment with 2% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 2%taper

root canal treatment with 4% taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 4 %taper

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

root canal treatment with 2% taper

root canal treatment with 2%taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 4% taper

root canal treatment with 4 %taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

root canal treatment with 6 %taper

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. 18-65 years of age of either sex
2. Asymptomatic teeth having pulpal necrosis with apical periodontitis in a mandibular molar (no response to EPT or cold test)
3. Radiographic evidence of periapical radiolucency corresponding to a periapical index (PAI) score \>/=3 in mesial root of mandibular molars

Exclusion Criteria

1. Patients who were medically compromised
2. Patients with initial apical binding file (IABF) size more than 20
3. Pregnancy; lactation \& contraceptives.
4. Positive history of antibiotic use within the past month or required antibiotic premedication for dental treatment (including infective endocarditis or pros thetic joint prophylaxis -
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences Rohtak

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Dr shweta MITTAL, MDS

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

PDIDS ROHTAK

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Pgids Rohtak

Rohtak, , India

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

India

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Dr shweta mittal, MDS

Role: CONTACT

9255596960

DR sahil saini, PG STUDENT

Role: CONTACT

7015863706

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Dr shweta Mittal, MDS

Role: primary

7015863706

SAHIL, MDS

Role: backup

7015863706

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

sahil

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.