Abstract
Objectives:
The study aims to compare the clinical and radiographic periapical healing outcomes between continuous and sequential chelation irrigation protocols (SCIP) in teeth diagnosed with periapical pathology.
Methods:
This double-blinded randomized controlled trial with parallel design compares the effectiveness of two irrigation protocols in root canal treatment of teeth diagnosed with periapical pathology, which are radiographically scored less than four on the Periapical Index (PAI) score. Forty samples were included in the study, meeting the specified inclusion criteria. The patients were randomly allocated to two equal groups: Sequential chelation (3% sodium hypochlorite [NaOCl] and 17% Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid [EDTA]) and continuous chelation (3% NaOCl and 9% 1-hydroxyethane- 1,1-diphsphonic acid [HEDP]) irrigation protocols with passive ultrasonic activation. Root canal treatment was performed in multiple visits, and radiographic and clinical assessment of periapical lesion healing was evaluated at baseline, three months, and six months using the PAI score and healing scores, respectively. These evaluations were subjected to statistical analysis (p < .05).
Results:
Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in clinical and radiographic outcomes at the three- and six-month follow-ups compared to baseline (p < .001). Intergroup comparisons revealed no statistically significant differences in periapical healing or clinical symptoms at any assessment interval (p > .05).
Conclusion:
Both sequential and continuous chelation irrigation protocols effectively promoted clinical and radiographic periapical healing at six-month follow-up. Hence, selecting an irrigation protocol may rely on clinician preference and procedural convenience.
CTRI Registration:
CTRI/2023/06/053912 (The Clinical Trials Registry-India).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.