World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2024 ) > List of Articles

REVIEW ARTICLE

Effect of Continuous Rotary and Reciprocating Instrumentation Motions in Single-file System on Postoperative Pain Incidence in Single-visit Nonsurgical Endodontic Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Manasi Surwade, Anuradha Patil, Sumanthini Margasahayam, Divya Naik

Keywords : Continuous rotary instrumentation motion, Nonsurgical endodontic treatment, Postoperative pain

Citation Information : Surwade M, Patil A, Margasahayam S, Naik D. Effect of Continuous Rotary and Reciprocating Instrumentation Motions in Single-file System on Postoperative Pain Incidence in Single-visit Nonsurgical Endodontic Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. World J Dent 2024; 15 (12):1092-1103.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2544

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-02-2025

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate postoperative pain in the single-file system with continuous rotary and reciprocating instrumentation motion. Background: Various rotary single-file systems have been used; however, there are no evidence-based recommendations on the effectiveness of instrumentation motions and their correlation to postoperative pain in single-file systems with different instrumentation motions. Data sources: PubMed, Scopus, EBSCOhost, and Cochrane from January 2012 to January 2023. Study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions: Population (P): Deciduous or permanent teeth; Interventions (I): A single-file system with continuous rotatory motions; Comparison (C): A single-file system with reciprocating motion; Outcomes (O): Postoperative pain; Study design (S): Randomized clinical studies. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 2.0 was used to ascertain validity across five domains. Risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and weighted mean difference for continuous variables were used as summary measures. Review results: Out of 10 clinical studies, 7 studies qualified for meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis state the mean difference has standard mean deviation with heterogeneity: τ2 = 0.52; χ2 = 88.56, df = 7 (p < 0.00001); I2 = 92%. Test for overall effect: Z = 0.26 (p = 0.79) with a 95% confidence interval. It can be concluded that no additional benefit of the test intervention was obtained over the control intervention. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that pain in the continuous rotary group was slightly higher than in the reciprocating group but was not significant enough. In addition, more intense pain was observed during the initial 7–12 hours, and a statistical difference between the severity of pain after 48 and 72 hours was noted. The intensity decreased as time progressed. Clinical significance: (1) When pain scores were taken into account without regard to follow-up, pain in the continuous rotary group was higher than in the reciprocating group; (2) This meta-analysis found a statistical difference between the severity of pain after 48 and 72 hours; (3) There was no significant difference between the rotary and reciprocating motion groups with regard to the parameters, including tooth type, mean age, gender, and degree of preoperative discomfort, which did not significantly vary as a factor in postoperative pain.

PDF Share
  1. Martins CM, De Souza Batista VE, Andolfatto Souza AC, et al. Reciprocating kinematics leads to lower incidences of postoperative pain than rotary kinematics after endodontic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial. J Conserv Dent 2019;22:320. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_439_18
  2. Sathorn C, Parashos P, Messer H. The prevalence of postoperative pain and flare-up in single- and multiple-visit endodontic treatment: a systematic review. Int Endod J 2008;41(2):91. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01316.x
  3. El Mubarak AH, Abu-bakr NH, Ibrahim YE. Postoperative pain in multiple-visit and single-visit root canal treatment. J Endod 2010;36(1):36. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.003
  4. Seltzer S, Naidorf IJ. Flare-ups in endodontics: I. Etiological factors. J Endod 1985;11(11):472. DOI: 10.1016/S0099-2399(85)80220-X
  5. Bürklein S, Schäfer E. Apically extruded debris with reciprocating single-file and full-sequence rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod 2012;38(6):850. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2012.02.017
  6. Koçak S, Koçak MM, Sağlam BC, et al. Apical extrusion of debris using self-adjusting file, reciprocating single-file, and 2 rotary instrumentation systems. J Endod 2013;39(10):1278. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2013.06.013
  7. Çiçek E, Koçak MM, Koçak S, et al. Postoperative pain intensity after using different instrumentation techniques: a randomized clinical study. J Appl Oral Sci 2017;25(1):20. DOI: 10.1590/1678-77572016-0138
  8. Relvas JBF, Bastos MMB, Marques AAF, et al. Assessment of postoperative pain after reciprocating or rotary NiTi instrumentation of root canals: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2016;20(8):1987. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1692-0
  9. Kherlakian D, Cunha RS, Ehrhardt IC, et al. Comparison of the incidence of postoperative pain after using 2 reciprocating systems and a continuous rotary system: a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2016;42(2):171. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.10.011
  10. Nekoofar MH, Sheykhrezae MS, Meraji N, et al. Comparison of the effect of root canal preparation by using WaveOne and ProTaper on postoperative pain: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2015;41(5):575. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.12.026
  11. Pasqualini D, Corbella S, Alovisi M, et al. Postoperative quality of life following single-visit root canal treatment performed by rotary or reciprocating instrumentation: a randomized clinical trial. Int Endod J 2016;49(11):1030. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12563
  12. Shokraneh A, Ajami M, Farhadi N, et al. Postoperative endodontic pain of three different instrumentation techniques in asymptomatic necrotic mandibular molars with periapical lesion: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2017;21(1):413. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-016-1807-2
  13. Zand V, Salem Milani A, Hassani Dehkharghani A, et al. Treatment of necrotic teeth using two engine-driven systems and patient's postoperative pain: a double-blind clinical trial. Iran Endod J 2016;11(4):267–272. DOI: 10.22037/iej.2016.3
  14. Caviedes-Bucheli J, Castellanos F, Vasquez N, et al. The influence of two reciprocating single-file and two rotary-file systems on the apical extrusion of debris and its biological relationship with symptomatic apical periodontitis. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Endod J 2016;49(3):255. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12452
  15. Hou XM, Su Z, Hou BX. Post endodontic pain following single-visit root canal preparation with rotary vs reciprocating instruments: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. BMC Oral Health 2017;17(1):86. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0355-8
  16. Hulsmann M, Peters OA, Dummer PMH. Mechanical preparation of root canals: shaping goals, techniques and means. Endod Top 2005;10(1):30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-1546.2005.00152
  17. Schäfer E, Schulz-Bongert U, Tulus G. Comparison of hand stainless steel and nickel titanium rotary instrumentation: a clinical study. J Endod 2004;30(6):432. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200406000-00014
  18. Cheung GSP, Liu CSY. A retrospective study of endodontic treatment outcome between Nickel-Titanium Rotary and Stainless Steel Hand Filing techniques. J Endod 2009;35(7):938. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2009.04.016
  19. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, et al. A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 2010;1(2):97. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.12
  20. Mantel N, Haenszel W. Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959;22(4):719. PMID: 13655060.
  21. Jain N, Pawar A, Gupta A. Incidence and severity of postoperative pain after canal instrumentation with reciprocating system, continuous rotary single file system, versus SAF system. Endod Pract 2016;10:153.
  22. Duval S, Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method. Biometrics 2000;56:455. DOI: 10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x
  23. Santiago JF, De Souza Batista VE, Verri FR, et al. Platform-switching implants and bone preservation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;45(3):332. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2015.11.009
  24. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33(1):159. PMID: 843571.
  25. Mollashahi NF, Saberi EA, Havaei SR, et al. Comparison of postoperative pain after root canal preparation with two reciprocating and rotary single-file systems: a randomized clinical trial. Iran Endod J 2017;12(1):15. DOI: 10.22037/iej.2017.03
  26. Adiguzel M, Tufenkci P, Pamukcu Ismail I. Comparison of postoperative pain intensity following the use of three different instrumentation techniques: a randomized clinical trial. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2019;13(2):133. DOI: 10.15171/joddd.2019.021
  27. Çanakçi BC, Er Ö, Genç Şen Ö, et al. The effect of two rotary and two reciprocating NiTi systems on postoperative pain after root canal retreatment on single-rooted incisor teeth: a randomized controlled trial. Int Endod J 2021;54(11):2016. DOI: 10.1111/iej.13609
  28. Yaser A, Maged Elfar HM, Mohamed Eid GEH. Postoperative pain after using reciprocating motion with Reciproc files versus adaptive motion with Twisted file adaptive in instrumentation of necrotic mandibular molars: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Endod J 2022;7(1):33. DOI: 10.14744/eej.2021.53215
  29. Elheeny AAH, Abdelmotelb MA. Postoperative pain after primary molar pulpectomy using rotary or reciprocating single files: a superior, parallel, randomized clinical trial. Int J Paediatr Dent 2022;32(6):819–827. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12959
  30. Al Omari T, Al Thobiti G, Al Thobaiti S, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after canal shaping by using Reciproc and Twisted File Adaptive systems: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig 2020;24(7):2445. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-019-03106-5
  31. Shaik RP, Chukka RS, Bandlapally A, et al. Assessment of postoperative pain after single-visit root canal treatment using rotary and reciprocating file systems: an in vivo study. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 2022;22(4):267. DOI: 10.17245/jdapm.2022.22.4.267
  32. Xavier F, Zuolo M, Nevares G, et al. Postoperative pain after use of the WaveOne Gold and XP-endo Shaper Systems: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2021;47(10):1550. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2021.06.013
  33. Neelakantan P, Sharma S. Pain after single-visit root canal treatment with two single-file systems based on different kinematics—a prospective randomized multicenter clinical study. Clin Oral Investig 2015;19(9):2211. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1448-x
  34. Ferraz CC, Gomes NV, Gomes BP, et al. Apical extrusion of debris and irrigants using two hand and three engine-driven instrumentation techniques. Int Endod J 2001;34(5):354. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2591.2001.00394.x
  35. Tinaz AC, Alacam T, Uzun O, et al. The effect of disruption of apical constriction on periapical extrusion. J Endod 2005;31(7):533. DOI: 10.1097/01.don.0000152294.35507.35
  36. Cintra LTA, Watanabe S, Samuel RO, et al. The use of NaOCl in combination with CHX produces cytotoxic product. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18(3):935. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-013-1049-5
  37. Karcioglu O, Topacoglu H, Dikme O, et al. A systematic review of the pain scales in adults: which to use? Am J Emerg Med 2018;36(4):707. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajem.2018.01.008
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.