Post-operative pain after root canal filling with two different obturation techniques: A prospective study

3Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Post-operative pain (POP) is a major problem in endodontics. This prospective study aims to investigate POP and the rate of analgesic intake after root canal treatment (RCT) using two obturation techniques: warm vertical compaction with epoxy resin-based sealer (WVT) versus sealer-based obturation (SBO) using a single-cone gutta-percha with calcium silicate-based sealer. Material and Methods: All RCT were carried out by the same endodontist, following a standardized protocol, and using two different obturation techniques: WVT with AH Plus sealer, and SBO with single-cone gutta-percha and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer. Patients finally assessed were 29 in the SBO group and 34 in the WVT group. After RCT, patients completed a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) that ranked the level of pain. Results were analysed statistically using the Chi-square, ANOVA tests and logistic regression analysis. Results: Sex, age, number of roots, pulp diagnosis, periapical status, previous intake of NSAIDs or antibiotics did not affected POP. In the WVT group, 38.2% of patients felt some pain 24 hours post-treatment, while in the SBO group this percentage was 20.7% (p = 0.07). There were no significant differences in the need for analgesics in the week following treatment. Conclusions: The obturation technique used did not affect significantly the POP of patients after RCT. Although the percentage of patients in the SOB group showing POP was lower, there were no significant differences in the need to take analgesics.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ruiz-Cano, A., Sánchez-Blanco, I., Saúco-Márquez, J. J., Cabanillas-Balsera, D., Martín-González, J., & Segura-Egea, J. J. (2024). Post-operative pain after root canal filling with two different obturation techniques: A prospective study. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 16(10), e1291–e1298. https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.62188

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free