Apical PeriodontitisNCT07173725
The Effect of Using Octenidine Hydrochloride as a Final Irrigation Solution on Teeth With Asymptomatic Apical Periodontitis on Postoperative Pain and Treatment Success: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Study
A study testing Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% and Chlorhexidine 2% in people with Apical Periodontitis and Postoperative Pain, run by Bezmialem Vakif University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This single-centre, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial compared two commonly used final irrigants in single-visit root canal treatment: octenidine dihydrochloride (OCT) and chlorhexidine (CHX). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Apical Periodontitis, Postoperative Pain
- What is being tested?
- Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% and Chlorhexidine 2%
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 142 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 8 Mar 2023to 20 Jul 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adults aged 18 to 65 years (inclusive)
- Single-rooted, single-canal tooth
- Diagnosis of asymptomatic apical periodontitis on periapical radiographs
- Able and willing to provide written informed consent
- Able to complete a 48-hour pain diary (6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h)
Who cannot join
- Symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess
- Previous root canal treatment of the study tooth
- Systemic condition requiring antibiotic prophylaxis or that interferes with pain assessment
- Pregnancy or lactation
- Known allergy or contraindication to study irrigants/materials
- Use of analgesics or anti-inflammatory drugs within 12 hours before treatment
- Inability to comply with study procedures
- More than one eligible tooth (one patient = one tooth rule; a pre-specified index tooth is selected)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Bezmialem Vakif University Dental Hospital - Department of Endodontics
Istanbul, 34093
About this study
Official title: Octenidine Versus Chlorhexidine as the Final Irrigant in Single-visit Endodontics: a Randomized Clinical Trial of Early Postoperative Pain
This single-centre, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial compared two commonly used final irrigants in single-visit root canal treatment: octenidine dihydrochloride (OCT) and chlorhexidine (CHX). Adults with single-rooted, single-canal teeth diagnosed with asymptomatic apical periodontitis were treated in one visit under local anaesthesia and rubber-dam isolation. After shaping with sodium hypochlorite and smear-layer removal with EDTA, the assigned final irrigant was delivered and sonically activated. In both groups, OCT 0.1 percent or CHX 2 percent was activated using three 20-second cycles, and the solution was refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Postoperative pain was recorded by participants on an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain) at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours. The primary outcome was pain at 48 hours. Secondary outcomes were pain at earlier time points, use of rescue analgesics within 0-48 hours, and unplanned urgent care within 48 hours. The aim was to determine whether OCT reduces early postoperative pain compared with CHX when used as the final irrigant in single-visit endodontics.
Read the detailed description
Design and setting. Prospective, randomized, parallel-group, blinded clinical trial conducted at a university dental hospital (Istanbul, Turkey). All treatments were completed in a single visit by an experienced endodontist using local anaesthesia and rubber-dam isolation.
Participants. Adults (18 years or older) with single-rooted, single-canal teeth diagnosed with asymptomatic apical periodontitis on periapical radiographs were eligible. Exclusion criteria included symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute abscess, previous root-canal treatment of the study tooth, systemic conditions interfering with pain assessment or requiring antibiotic prophylaxis, pregnancy or lactation, known allergy to study materials, and use of analgesics or anti-inflammatory drugs within 12 hours before treatment. One patient contributed one tooth.
Randomization, allocation concealment, and masking. Participants were randomized 1:1 to OCT or CHX using computer-generated permuted blocks with stratification by baseline pain (NRS <= 3 vs > 3). Allocation was concealed with sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Irrigants were prepared by a third party in identical opaque syringes labelled A/B. Participants, the care provider (operator), and the outcomes assessor were blinded until database lock.
Interventions. Working length was established with an electronic apex locator and confirmed radiographically when needed. Root canals were prepared with nickel-titanium rotary instruments to size 40/0.04. During shaping, 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite was used (approximately 2 mL after each instrument change). The smear layer was removed with 17 percent EDTA (about 10 mL) activated with a sonic device, followed by saline. For the final irrigation, the allocated solution was delivered and sonically activated using the same protocol in both groups: OCT 0.1 percent or CHX 2 percent, activated in three 20-second cycles with the solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). A side-vented needle was placed short of the working length. Root-canal obturation was completed in the same session using gutta-percha and an epoxy resin-based sealer with cold lateral compaction. Access cavities were restored with a resin composite. Rescue analgesics were permitted as needed and recorded by patients.
Outcomes. Primary outcome: patient-reported pain on the 0-10 NRS at 48 hours after treatment. Secondary outcomes: NRS pain at 6, 12, and 24 hours; total rescue analgesic consumption from 0 to 48 hours; and unplanned urgent care or adverse events within 48 hours.
Sample size and analysis plan. The a priori sample-size calculation assumed a between-group difference of 1.0 NRS unit (SD 2.0), alpha 0.05, and power 0.80, yielding 100 participants; allowing for attrition, the target was 120. Analyses compared groups at 48 hours and evaluated pain trajectories over time using mixed-effects methods with fixed effects for group and time and a random intercept for participant. Two-sided p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Oversight. The protocol was approved by the Bezmialem Vakif University Clinical Research Ethics Committee (approval E.99606). The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
- Conditions
- Apical Periodontitis, Postoperative Pain
- Being tested
- Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1%, Chlorhexidine 2%
- Keywords
- Endodontics, Root canal treatment, Final irrigant, Single-visit endodontics, Chlorhexidine, Octenidine
- Medical subject headings
- Periapical Periodontitis, Pain, Postoperative
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1%Drug
Also called OCT; Octenidine 0.1% solution
Final intracanal irrigant (aqueous solution); single administration during the final irrigation phase. Sonic activation performed in three 20-second cycles; solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL per canal). Delivered through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length.
Chlorhexidine 2%Drug
Also called CHX; Chlorhexidine 2% solution
Final intracanal irrigant (aqueous solution); single administration during the final irrigation phase. Sonic activation performed in three 20-second cycles; solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL per canal). Delivered through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Octenidine 0.1% final irrigant | Experimental | Single-visit root canal treatment with octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% as the final irrigant. The irrigant was sonically activated using three 20-second cycles; the solution was refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Delivery through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. The final irrigant was administered once, during the final irrigation phase. All other procedural steps were identical to the comparator arm. Receives: Drug: Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% |
| Chlorhexidine 2% final irrigant | Active comparator | Single-visit root canal treatment with chlorhexidine 2% as the final irrigant. The irrigant was sonically activated using the same protocol as the experimental arm: three 20-second cycles with the solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Delivery through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. The final irrigant was administered once, during the final irrigation phase. All other procedural steps were identical to the experimental arm. Receives: Drug: Chlorhexidine 2% |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pain at 48 hours (NRS 0-10)
Patient-reported pain on the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain). Higher scores indicate worse pain. Assessed using a patient diary. Analysis compares OCT vs CHX at 48 hours; analysis population includes all randomized participants with an available 48 h NRS value.
Measured: 48 hours after treatment
Secondary outcomes (6)
Pain at 6 hours (NRS 0-10)
Patient-reported NRS pain score (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain). Higher scores indicate worse pain. Assessed using a patient diary; between-group comparison at 6 hours.
Measured: 6 hours after treatment
Pain at 12 hours (NRS 0-10)
Patient-reported NRS pain score (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain). Higher scores indicate worse pain. Assessed using a patient diary; between-group comparison at 12 hours.
Measured: 12 hours after treatment
Pain at 24 hours (NRS 0-10)
Patient-reported NRS pain score (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain). Higher scores indicate worse pain. Assessed using a patient diary; between-group comparison at 24 hours.
Measured: 24 hours after treatment
Rescue analgesic consumption (0-48 hours)
Number of self-reported rescue analgesic doses taken from 0 to 48 hours after treatment (any medication allowed per routine care). Participants recorded type, dose, and timing in a diary. Higher counts indicate greater analgesic use.
Measured: 0 to 48 hours after treatment
Unplanned urgent care within 48 hours
Count of participants who required unplanned urgent dental care (eg, unscheduled clinic visit or phone consultation requiring prescription) within 48 hours after treatment. Reported as number and proportion of participants.
Measured: Up to 48 hours after treatment
Adverse events within 48 hours (postoperative flare-up and other events)
Occurrence of any adverse event within 48 hours after treatment, including postoperative flare-up requiring unplanned care. Reported as number and proportion of participants with at least one event; serious and non-serious events summarized separately.
Measured: Up to 48 hours after treatment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Sep 2025
- Study start8 Mar 2023
- Primary completion18 Oct 2024
- Study completion20 Jul 2025
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.
- More trials run by Bezmialem Vakif UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Model description
- Randomized, parallel-group, single-centre endodontic trial; single-visit treatment; final irrigant: octenidine vs chlorhexidine.
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Bezmialem Vakif University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- fatma B peker, dds, Principal investigator, Department of Endodontics, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07173725
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 08.03.2023-E.99606
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 8 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 15 Sep 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 15 Sep 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Octenidine Versus Chlorhexidine as the Final Irrigant in Single-visit Endodontics: a Randomized Clinical Trial of Early Postoperative Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07173725
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 08.03.2023-E.99606
- Conditions
- Apical Periodontitis, Postoperative Pain
- Keywords
- Endodontics, Root canal treatment, Final irrigant, Single-visit endodontics, Chlorhexidine, Octenidine
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 142 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Bezmialem Vakif UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Mar 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 18 Oct 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 20 Jul 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Sep 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 single-centre, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial compared two commonly used final irrigants in single-visit root canal treatment: octenidine dihydrochloride (OCT) and chlorhexidine (CHX). Adults with single-rooted, single-canal teeth diagnosed with asymptomatic apical periodontitis were treated in one visit under local anaesthesia and rubber-dam isolation. After shaping with sodium hypochlorite and smear-layer removal with EDTA, the assigned final irrigant was delivered and sonically activated. In both groups, OCT 0.1 percent or CHX 2 percent was activated using three 20-second cycles, and the solution was refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Postoperative pain was recorded by participants on an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain) at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours. The primary outcome was pain at 48 hours. Secondary outcomes were pain at earlier time points, use of rescue analgesics within 0-48 hours, and unplanned urgent care within 48 hours. The aim was to determine whether OCT reduces early postoperative pain compared with CHX when used as the final irrigant in single-visit endodontics.
Detailed description
Design and setting. Prospective, randomized, parallel-group, blinded clinical trial conducted at a university dental hospital (Istanbul, Turkey). All treatments were completed in a single visit by an experienced endodontist using local anaesthesia and rubber-dam isolation.
Participants. Adults (18 years or older) with single-rooted, single-canal teeth diagnosed with asymptomatic apical periodontitis on periapical radiographs were eligible. Exclusion criteria included symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute abscess, previous root-canal treatment of the study tooth, systemic conditions interfering with pain assessment or requiring antibiotic prophylaxis, pregnancy or lactation, known allergy to study materials, and use of analgesics or anti-inflammatory drugs within 12 hours before treatment. One patient contributed one tooth.
Randomization, allocation concealment, and masking. Participants were randomized 1:1 to OCT or CHX using computer-generated permuted blocks with stratification by baseline pain (NRS <= 3 vs > 3). Allocation was concealed with sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Irrigants were prepared by a third party in identical opaque syringes labelled A/B. Participants, the care provider (operator), and the outcomes assessor were blinded until database lock.
Interventions. Working length was established with an electronic apex locator and confirmed radiographically when needed. Root canals were prepared with nickel-titanium rotary instruments to size 40/0.04. During shaping, 5.25 percent sodium hypochlorite was used (approximately 2 mL after each instrument change). The smear layer was removed with 17 percent EDTA (about 10 mL) activated with a sonic device, followed by saline. For the final irrigation, the allocated solution was delivered and sonically activated using the same protocol in both groups: OCT 0.1 percent or CHX 2 percent, activated in three 20-second cycles with the solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). A side-vented needle was placed short of the working length. Root-canal obturation was completed in the same session using gutta-percha and an epoxy resin-based sealer with cold lateral compaction. Access cavities were restored with a resin composite. Rescue analgesics were permitted as needed and recorded by patients.
Outcomes. Primary outcome: patient-reported pain on the 0-10 NRS at 48 hours after treatment. Secondary outcomes: NRS pain at 6, 12, and 24 hours; total rescue analgesic consumption from 0 to 48 hours; and unplanned urgent care or adverse events within 48 hours.
Sample size and analysis plan. The a priori sample-size calculation assumed a between-group difference of 1.0 NRS unit (SD 2.0), alpha 0.05, and power 0.80, yielding 100 participants; allowing for attrition, the target was 120. Analyses compared groups at 48 hours and evaluated pain trajectories over time using mixed-effects methods with fixed effects for group and time and a random intercept for participant. Two-sided p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Oversight. The protocol was approved by the Bezmialem Vakif University Clinical Research Ethics Committee (approval E.99606). The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized, parallel-group, single-centre endodontic trial; single-visit treatment; final irrigant: octenidine vs chlorhexidine.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Octenidine 0.1% final irrigant | Experimental | Drug: Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1%Single-visit root canal treatment with octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% as the final irrigant. The irrigant was sonically activated using three 20-second cycles; the solution was refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Delivery through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. The final irrigant was administered once, during the final irrigation phase. All other procedural steps were identical to the comparator arm. |
| Chlorhexidine 2% final irrigant | Active comparator | Drug: Chlorhexidine 2%Single-visit root canal treatment with chlorhexidine 2% as the final irrigant. The irrigant was sonically activated using the same protocol as the experimental arm: three 20-second cycles with the solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL). Delivery through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. The final irrigant was administered once, during the final irrigation phase. All other procedural steps were identical to the experimental arm. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Adults aged 18 to 65 years (inclusive)
- Single-rooted, single-canal tooth
- Diagnosis of asymptomatic apical periodontitis on periapical radiographs
- Able and willing to provide written informed consent
- Able to complete a 48-hour pain diary (6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h)
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Symptomatic apical periodontitis or acute apical abscess
- Previous root canal treatment of the study tooth
- Systemic condition requiring antibiotic prophylaxis or that interferes with pain assessment
- Pregnancy or lactation
- Known allergy or contraindication to study irrigants/materials
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1%Also: OCT; Octenidine 0.1% solutionFinal intracanal irrigant (aqueous solution); single administration during the final irrigation phase. Sonic activation performed in three 20-second cycles; solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL per canal). Delivered through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. | Drug | Octenidine 0.1% final irrigant |
| Chlorhexidine 2%Also: CHX; Chlorhexidine 2% solutionFinal intracanal irrigant (aqueous solution); single administration during the final irrigation phase. Sonic activation performed in three 20-second cycles; solution refreshed with 2 mL between cycles (approximate total 6 mL per canal). Delivered through a side-vented needle positioned short of the working length. | Drug | Chlorhexidine 2% final irrigant |
Primary outcome
Pain at 48 hours (NRS 0-10)
Time frame: 48 hours after treatment
Patient-reported pain on the 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS, 0 = no pain, 10 = worst pain). Higher scores indicate worse pain. Assessed using a patient diary. Analysis compares OCT vs CHX at 48 hours; analysis population includes all randomized participants with an available 48 h NRS value.
6 secondary outcomes
Pain at 6 hours (NRS 0-10)
Time frame: 6 hours after treatment
Pain at 12 hours (NRS 0-10)
Time frame: 12 hours after treatment
Pain at 24 hours (NRS 0-10)
Time frame: 24 hours after treatment
Rescue analgesic consumption (0-48 hours)
Time frame: 0 to 48 hours after treatment
Unplanned urgent care within 48 hours
Time frame: Up to 48 hours after treatment
Adverse events within 48 hours (postoperative flare-up and other events)
Time frame: Up to 48 hours after treatment
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Sep 2025.
- Bezmialem Vakif University - study siteLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Apical Periodontitis
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
Active, not recruiting
Early Healing of Apical Periodontitis After Root Canal Treatment With Bioceramic and Calcium Hydroxide Medicaments: Evaluation Using PAI and ImageJ
Apical Periodontitis, Root Canal Treatment
Not yet recruiting
Clinical and Inflammatory Outcomes of Regenerative Endodontic Treatment Using Injectable Platelet-Rich Fibrin in Mature Necrotic Teeth With Chronic Apical Periodontitis.
Chronic Apical Periodontitis, Pulp Necrosis
Recruiting
Effect of Ultrasonic and Diode Laser Activated Irrigation on Postoperative Pain Following Root Canal Treatment
Symptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis and Symptomatic 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. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
fatma B peker, dds principal investigator
Department of Endodontics, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, Turkey
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Octenidine dihydrochloride 0.1% and Chlorhexidine 2% in people with Apical Periodontitis and Postoperative Pain, run by Bezmialem Vakif University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
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 5 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Sep 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Pain at 48 hours (NRS 0-10) (time frame: 48 hours after treatment). 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 15 Sep 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.