Prospective Comparative Randomized Clinical Trial of Three Endodontic Retrograde Filling Materials
Overview
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Intervention
- EndoSequence
- Conditions
- Periapical Abscess
- Sponsor
- University of the Pacific
- Enrollment
- 59
- Primary Endpoint
- Rate of remineralization
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 6 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
This prospective comparative randomized clinical trial compares healing and bony regeneration in patients who received 1 of 3 different retrograde filling materials following microsurgical apicoectomies for the treatment of periapical lesions of endodontic origin.
Detailed Description
A prospective comparative randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate the healing and bony regeneration in patients who received 1 of 3 different retrograde filling materials (EndoSequence®, ProRoot® MTA, or Biodentine®) following microsurgical apicoectomies for the treatment of periapical lesions of endodontic origin.
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Adult patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification I and II
- •Any tooth with a single chronic periapical lesion requiring apical microsurgery
- •Informed consent signed prior to surgery
Exclusion Criteria
- •Background of drug/alcohol abuse
- •Adjacent periapical lesion
- •Periodontal disease
Arms & Interventions
Group 1 EndoSequence
The EndoSequence® retrograde sealing material was used to provide a biologic seal at the apex.
Intervention: EndoSequence
Group 2 ProRoot MTA
The ProRoot® MTA retrograde sealing material was used to provide a biologic seal at the apex.
Intervention: ProRoot MTA
Group 3 Biodentine
The Biodentine® retrograde sealing material was used to provide a biologic seal at the apex.
Intervention: Biodentine
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Rate of remineralization
Time Frame: 6 months
The pace at which new bone is redeposited