Impact of Minimally Invasive Endodontic Treatment on the Prognosis of Mandibular Permanent Molars With Necrotic Pulp and Apical Periodontitis

August 8, 2026 updated by: Mohamed Ashraf Abdeen
Statement of the problem: The effectiveness of minimally invasive endodontic treatments in managing necrotic pulp with apical periodontitis remains understudied. Aim of the study: This research aims to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive versus traditional root canal treatments in patients with necrotic pulp associated with apical periodontitis. Material and methods: sixty healthy patients of both genders aged from 20 to 50 years old suffering from necrotic pulp associated with apical periodontitis in their lower first molars with four root canals will be included in this study. The initial assessment will include a preoperative CBCT scan. Participants will be randomly assigned according to the type of endodontic treatment to two groups; a traditional treatment group (Trad); in which a traditional access cavity design and root canal preparation extending three sizes beyond the initial apical file using taper .04 rotary files will be accomplished and a minimally invasive group (MI) in which a conservative access cavity and a conservative root canal preparation up to #20/.04 will be performed. Both groups will receive an identical irrigation protocol during root canal instrumentation augmented with passive ultrasonic activation. Immediately following biomechanical preparation, the root canals will be filled with single cone obturation technique. Root canal disinfection will be evaluated using a culture method in which two bacterial samplings will be collected, one before and another after the biomechanical preparation. Patients will be monitored over 12 months, concluding with a follow-up CBCT scan to assess periapical healing. Data will be collected and statistically analyzed.

Study Overview

Status

Not yet recruiting

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

60

Phase

  • Phase 2
  • Phase 3

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Asyut Governorate
      • Asyut, Asyut Governorate, Egypt
        • Faculty of dentistry, Assiut university
        • Contact:

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Participants with free medical history (category: American Society of Anaesthesiologists class I) from either gender aged from 20 to 50 years old.
  2. Necrotic lower first molars with four root canals (two mesials and two distals).
  3. Teeth have a periapical radiolucency with a diameter of 2-4 mm in CBCT images.
  4. Teeth show root curvature of 10°-20° as described by Schnider.
  5. Participant that indicated for single visit root canal treatment.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Calcified or non-negotiatable teeth.
  2. Participants who cannot apply for the follow-up schedule.
  3. Teeth that show any signs of cracks or vertical root fractures.
  4. Teeth that show less than 50% of sound coronal tooth structure.
  5. Periodontally affected teeth.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Traditional group
In this group traditional access cavity and canal preparations is done
Root canal treatment is done
Active Comparator: Minimally invasive group
In this group conservative access cavity and minimally invasive root canal preparation is done
Root canal treatment is done

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Success rate
Time Frame: 1 year follow up

A case is deemed successful if there is no clinical signs and symptoms of infection or inflammation and radiographic bone healing.

The success rate for each group will be determined by the ratio of successful cases to the total number of cases in that group.

1 year follow up

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Healing of periapical lesion
Time Frame: 1 year
The change in the size of periapical radiolucencies will be assessed through a comparison of CBCT images taken preoperatively and at the 12-month follow-up. This evaluation will be conducted by two independent operators who are not aware of the treatment group assignments to ensure unbiased results.
1 year
Bacterial load
Time Frame: Within 2 days after intervention

The bacterial levels within the root canals will be quantified at two critical stages of the treatment process:

S1: Immediately following the creation of the access cavity, prior to initiating any cleaning or shaping procedures. This step is crucial for determining the initial bacterial load present in the root canal system.

S2: Following irrigant activation. This measurement will provide insight into the efficacy of the cleaning and shaping procedures, as well as the irrigation protocol, in reducing the bacterial population within the canal. These bacterial samples will be collected using sterile a three size #15 paper points which will be inserted into the canals to absorb the canal contents. This method ensures a standardized approach to bacterial sampling at these specified stages of the treatment.

Within 2 days after intervention
Treatment duration
Time Frame: During procedure
The total time taken to complete the treatment procedure, from the beginning of the access cavity preparation to the completion of obturation, will be meticulously recorded for each case.
During procedure
Iatrogenic errors
Time Frame: During procedure
Any occurrences of iatrogenic errors, such as instrument separation, will be noted and recorded. This data will provide insight into the potential risks associated with each treatment approach.
During procedure

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

July 23, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

September 1, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

September 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

July 22, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 8, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

August 13, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 13, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 8, 2026

Last Verified

July 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

YES

IPD Plan Description

All collected IPD

IPD Sharing Time Frame

Beginning after publication of results and ending after 2 years

IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type

  • STUDY_PROTOCOL
  • SAP
  • ICF
  • CSR

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe