Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 2381
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 467-473

Effect of three different rotary instrumentation systems on postinstrumentation pain: A randomized clinical trial

1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sree Balaji Dental College and Hospital, Bharath University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Department of Oral Physiology and Endodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Correspondence Address:
Arunajatesan Subbiya
No: 35, 3rd Avenue, Indra Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020, Tamil Nadu
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_350_16

Rights and Permissions

Background: Endodontic instrumentation is liable to cause some postinstrumentation pain (PIP). Rotary endodontic instruments differ in their design, metallurgy, surface treatment, etc. Aim: This randomized clinical trial aimed to assess the incidence of PIP after root canal instrumentation with three different rotary endodontic systems which differ in their design, namely, ProTaper, Mtwo, and K3. Materials and Methods: A total of 150 patients between the ages of 25 and 50 were chosen for the study. Teeth with asymptomatic irreversible pulpitis due to carious exposure were selected. The patients received local anesthesia by inferior alveolar nerve block. After preparing the access cavity, root canal instrumentation was done with one of the three instruments (n = 50) and closed dressing was given. PIP was assessed every 12 h for 5 days, and tenderness to percussion was analyzed at the end of 1, 3, and 7 days. Statistical Analysis: Mann–Whitney U-test to determine significant differences at P < 0.01. Results: The PIP and tenderness were less in Mtwo group when compared to ProTaper and K3 groups up to 84 h and 72 h respectively and statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between ProTaper and K3 both in PIP and tenderness. Conclusion: Rotary endodontic instrumentation causes some degree of PIP and tenderness to percussion. Among the instruments used, Mtwo causes less PIP and tenderness when compared to ProTaper and K3, and there was no difference between ProTaper and K3. Clinical Relevance: PIP is highly subjective and may vary among different subjects. The apical (3 mm) taper of ProTaper was 0.08 followed by a smaller taper, whereas, the other two files were of a constant 0.06 taper, which means there could have been a greater apical extrusion and therefore more PIP. Despite, the mean of the age was similar, there could have been a difference in the size of the canal and therefore a difference in apical extrusion and PIP.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded163    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal