Apical PeriodontitisNCT07101003
A Comparative Evaluation of the Degree of Pain and MMP-9 Expression Following Instrumentation of Necrotic Pulps With Apical Periodontitis in One or Two Visits
A study testing single visit instrumentation and multiple visit instrumentation in people with Apical Periodontitis and Necrotic Pulps, run by Marwa Hisham Mohamed Salah Eldin.
Trial summary
This randomized clinical trial compares postoperative pain and MMP-9 levels after root canal treatment of necrotic teeth with apical periodontitis, using either single-visit or two-visit instrumentation. The primary outcome is pain intensity measured at multiple intervals using a Visual Analogue Scale. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 40 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Apical Periodontitis, Necrotic Pulps, Single Rooted Teeth
- What is being tested?
- single visit instrumentation and multiple visit instrumentation
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 28 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2025to 4 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 40 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Age between 18-40 years.
- Males/Females.
- Straight single canaled permanent teeth:
- Non-Vital pulps.
- Negative response to cold pulp tester (ethyl chloride spray*).
- Absence of spontaneous pain.
Show all 13Show fewer
- Chronic apical periodontitis with negative response to percussion
- Slight widening in the periodontal membrane space or with periapical radiolucency not exceeding 2*2 mm radiographically. The Periapical Index (PAI) score by Ørstavik is 2 or 3 (Ørstavik et al., 1986 43)
- Systemically healthy patients (ASA I or II)
- No anti-inflammatory or antibiotic medications taken in the past month
- Patients' acceptance to participate in the trial.
- Patients who can understand pain scale and can sign the informed consent (Appendix I).
- Patients' acceptance to participate in the trial.
Who cannot join
- Medically compromised patients having significant systemic disorders. (ASA III or IV).
- Teeth with swelling or fistulous tract.
- Teeth with acute or chronic periapical abscess.
- Mobility Grade II or III.
- Previous root canal therapy.
- Non-restorable teeth.
- Immature teeth.
- Pregnant females.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: A Comparative Evaluation of the Degree of Pain and MMP-9 Expression Following Instrumentation of Necrotic Pulps With Apical Periodontitis in One or Two Visits: A Randomized Clinical Trial
This randomized clinical trial compares postoperative pain and MMP-9 levels after root canal treatment of necrotic teeth with apical periodontitis, using either single-visit or two-visit instrumentation. The primary outcome is pain intensity measured at multiple intervals using a Visual Analogue Scale. The secondary outcome is the periapical expression of MMP-9 assessed via ELISA. The trial aims to determine whether treatment timing impacts inflammation and healing.
Read the detailed description
This randomized clinical trial is designed as a parallel-group superiority study with an allocation ratio of 1:1. It is conducted at the postgraduate outpatient clinic of the Endodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University. The target population includes adult patients aged between 18 and 40 years who present with straight, single-canaled permanent teeth diagnosed with necrotic pulp and chronic apical periodontitis. The diagnosis is confirmed using clinical criteria such as a negative response to cold testing, absence of spontaneous pain, and radiographic findings showing periapical radiolucency not exceeding 2×2 mm with a PAI score of 2 or 3. Only systemically healthy individuals (ASA I or II) who have not taken antibiotics or anti-inflammatory drugs in the past month and can comprehend the pain scoring system are included. Patients with acute infections, non-restorable teeth, prior root canal treatment, or significant systemic conditions are excluded.
Eligible patients are randomly assigned into two groups using a computer-generated randomization sequence. Allocation is concealed and handled by the co-supervisor. The experimental group receives single-visit root canal instrumentation, while the control group undergoes a two-visit protocol. In both groups, treatment begins with standard diagnostic procedures, local anesthesia, rubber dam isolation, and access cavity preparation. Before instrumentation, a baseline periapical fluid sample (PS-1) is collected by inserting sterile paper points beyond the apex into the canal for 60 seconds and storing them at -80°C for later MMP-9 analysis via ELISA.
In the single-visit group, biomechanical preparation is completed in one session using Fanta Blue rotary files with a 4% taper, progressing to size 40. Irrigation is performed with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite after each file, followed by saline as a final rinse. The access cavity is sealed temporarily with glass ionomer or IRM. Patients are instructed to record postoperative pain using a modified Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours. One week later, a second periapical sample (PS-2) is collected under local anesthesia and rubber dam isolation.
The control group undergoes a two-visit protocol. In the first visit, canal preparation is only performed up to size 25, with the same irrigation and temporary sealing as in the experimental group. The second visit, one week later, includes collection of the second periapical sample (PS-2), followed by completion of instrumentation to size 40. All patients receive postoperative instructions and pain charts, and are asked to return after three days for chart collection and assessment.
The primary outcome of the study is the intensity of postoperative pain, measured at five time points using the modified VAS. The secondary outcome is the level of MMP-9 expression in the periapical tissues before and after treatment. Data are analyzed using IBM SPSS v22. Normality of data is tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. If data are normally distributed, independent t-tests are used to compare groups; otherwise, the Mann-Whitney U test is applied. Statistical significance is set at p ≤ 0.05.
To ensure data integrity, all forms are coded, stored securely, and access is restricted to the study team. Blinding is applied to patients, the outcome assessor, the lab technician performing ELISA, and the statistician. The sample size is calculated based on prior literature to detect a clinically significant difference in pain scores, leading to a total enrollment of 28 patients (14 per group), accounting for a 25% dropout rate.
- Conditions
- Apical Periodontitis, Necrotic Pulps, Single Rooted Teeth
- Being tested
- single visit instrumentation, multiple visit instrumentation
- Keywords
- necrotic pulps, root canal system, Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis), Microbioogy, pain, bacterial reduction, Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs)
- Medical subject headings
- Periapical Periodontitis, Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
single visit instrumentationProcedure or surgery
root canal instrumentation will be done on single visit treatment
multiple visit instrumentationProcedure or surgery
root canal treatment will be done on two visits
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Multiple instrumentation | Active comparator | root canal instrumentation will be done on two visits as a control Receives: Procedure: multiple visit instrumentation |
| single instrumentation | Experimental | Root canal instrumentation will be done on one visits Receives: Procedure: single visit instrumentation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Post instrumentation Pain
Pain will be measured At 6,12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post instrumentation by Modified Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
Measured: At 6,12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post instrumentation
Secondary outcomes (1)
MMP-9 level
measure expression of MMP-9 After access cavity (pre-instrumentation \& 1 week post-instrumentation
Measured: pre-instrumentation & 1 week post-instrumentation
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Aug 2025
- Study start1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion4 Aug 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Apical PeriodontitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 28 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Marwa Hisham Mohamed Salah Eldin
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Marwa Hisham Mohamed Salah Eldin, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07101003
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 14422023517120
- Status last verified
- Jul 2025
- First submitted
- 28 Jul 2025
- Last updated
- 3 Aug 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Aug 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Comparative Evaluation of the Degree of Pain and MMP-9 Expression Following Instrumentation of Necrotic Pulps With Apical Periodontitis in One or Two Visits: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07101003
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 14422023517120
- Conditions
- Apical Periodontitis, Necrotic Pulps, Single Rooted Teeth
- Keywords
- necrotic pulps, root canal system, Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis), Microbioogy, pain, bacterial reduction, Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs)
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 28 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Marwa Hisham Mohamed Salah EldinUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 4 Aug 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This randomized clinical trial compares postoperative pain and MMP-9 levels after root canal treatment of necrotic teeth with apical periodontitis, using either single-visit or two-visit instrumentation. The primary outcome is pain intensity measured at multiple intervals using a Visual Analogue Scale. The secondary outcome is the periapical expression of MMP-9 assessed via ELISA. The trial aims to determine whether treatment timing impacts inflammation and healing.
Detailed description
This randomized clinical trial is designed as a parallel-group superiority study with an allocation ratio of 1:1. It is conducted at the postgraduate outpatient clinic of the Endodontics Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University. The target population includes adult patients aged between 18 and 40 years who present with straight, single-canaled permanent teeth diagnosed with necrotic pulp and chronic apical periodontitis. The diagnosis is confirmed using clinical criteria such as a negative response to cold testing, absence of spontaneous pain, and radiographic findings showing periapical radiolucency not exceeding 2×2 mm with a PAI score of 2 or 3. Only systemically healthy individuals (ASA I or II) who have not taken antibiotics or anti-inflammatory drugs in the past month and can comprehend the pain scoring system are included. Patients with acute infections, non-restorable teeth, prior root canal treatment, or significant systemic conditions are excluded.
Eligible patients are randomly assigned into two groups using a computer-generated randomization sequence. Allocation is concealed and handled by the co-supervisor. The experimental group receives single-visit root canal instrumentation, while the control group undergoes a two-visit protocol. In both groups, treatment begins with standard diagnostic procedures, local anesthesia, rubber dam isolation, and access cavity preparation. Before instrumentation, a baseline periapical fluid sample (PS-1) is collected by inserting sterile paper points beyond the apex into the canal for 60 seconds and storing them at -80°C for later MMP-9 analysis via ELISA.
In the single-visit group, biomechanical preparation is completed in one session using Fanta Blue rotary files with a 4% taper, progressing to size 40. Irrigation is performed with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite after each file, followed by saline as a final rinse. The access cavity is sealed temporarily with glass ionomer or IRM. Patients are instructed to record postoperative pain using a modified Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours. One week later, a second periapical sample (PS-2) is collected under local anesthesia and rubber dam isolation.
The control group undergoes a two-visit protocol. In the first visit, canal preparation is only performed up to size 25, with the same irrigation and temporary sealing as in the experimental group. The second visit, one week later, includes collection of the second periapical sample (PS-2), followed by completion of instrumentation to size 40. All patients receive postoperative instructions and pain charts, and are asked to return after three days for chart collection and assessment.
The primary outcome of the study is the intensity of postoperative pain, measured at five time points using the modified VAS. The secondary outcome is the level of MMP-9 expression in the periapical tissues before and after treatment. Data are analyzed using IBM SPSS v22. Normality of data is tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk tests. If data are normally distributed, independent t-tests are used to compare groups; otherwise, the Mann-Whitney U test is applied. Statistical significance is set at p ≤ 0.05.
To ensure data integrity, all forms are coded, stored securely, and access is restricted to the study team. Blinding is applied to patients, the outcome assessor, the lab technician performing ELISA, and the statistician. The sample size is calculated based on prior literature to detect a clinically significant difference in pain scores, leading to a total enrollment of 28 patients (14 per group), accounting for a 25% dropout rate.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Multiple instrumentation | Active comparator | Procedure: multiple visit instrumentationroot canal instrumentation will be done on two visits as a control |
| single instrumentation | Experimental | Procedure: single visit instrumentationRoot canal instrumentation will be done on one visits |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 40 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Age between 18-40 years.
- Males/Females.
- Straight single canaled permanent teeth:
- Systemically healthy patients (ASA I or II)
- No anti-inflammatory or antibiotic medications taken in the past month
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Medically compromised patients having significant systemic disorders. (ASA III or IV).
- Teeth with swelling or fistulous tract.
- Teeth with acute or chronic periapical abscess.
- Mobility Grade II or III.
- Previous root canal therapy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| single visit instrumentationroot canal instrumentation will be done on single visit treatment | Procedure or surgery | single instrumentation |
| multiple visit instrumentationroot canal treatment will be done on two visits | Procedure or surgery | Multiple instrumentation |
Primary outcome
Post instrumentation Pain
Time frame: At 6,12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post instrumentation
Pain will be measured At 6,12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post instrumentation by Modified Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)
1 secondary outcome
MMP-9 level
Time frame: pre-instrumentation & 1 week post-instrumentation
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Aug 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Apical Periodontitis
Recruiting
Effect of Cryotherapeutic and Nanotherapeutic Sodium Hypochlorite on Post-Operative Endodontic Pain.
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis, Symptomatic Apical Periodontitis
Recruiting
Effects of Different Activation Techniques on Antimicrobial Photodynamic Therapy in Apical Periodontitis
Apical Periodontitis, Endodontic Retreatment
Not yet recruiting
Post-operative Pain and Clinical Outcome After Single-cone Obturation With a Calcium Silicate-based Versus Epoxy Resin Sealer
Post Operative Pain, Acute, Irreversible Pulpitis (Toothache)
Not yet recruiting
PRP-Assisted Regenerative Endodontics Versus Conventional Root Canal Treatment in Mature Necrotic Teeth
Pulp Necrosis, Apical Periodontitis
Not yet recruiting
Influence of Continuous Rotation Versus Reciprocation Motion of MG3 Blue Rotary File on Postoperative Pain and Intracanal Bacterial Reduction of Teeth With Necrotic Pulps.
Necrotic Pulps With no Apical Periodontitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing single visit instrumentation and multiple visit instrumentation in people with Apical Periodontitis and Necrotic Pulps, run by Marwa Hisham Mohamed Salah Eldin.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 13 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Aug 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Marwa Hisham Mohamed, MSc (00201007096807, Marwa_hisham@dentistry.cu.edu.eg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Post instrumentation Pain (time frame: At 6,12, 24, 48 and 72 hours post instrumentation). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Aug 2025.