Trial suggests no difference between single-visit and two-visit root canal treatment

Balto K1

  • 1Center of Excellence in Osteoporosis Research, School of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah.

Summary

A single-visit root canal treatment (RoCT) is as effective as a two-visit procedure for healing apical periodontitis. This randomized controlled trial found no significant difference in radiographic outcomes between one and two-visit root canal treatments.

Related Concept Videos

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
Bioavailability Study Design: Single Versus Multiple Dose Studies01:11

Bioavailability Study Design: Single Versus Multiple Dose Studies

Bioavailability studies are essential for understanding how a drug is absorbed, distributed, metabolized, and excreted in the body. These studies assess the extent and rate at which the active pharmaceutical agent becomes available at the site of action. The design of bioavailability studies can involve single-dose or multiple-dose regimens, each with distinct advantages and limitations.Single-dose studies are the preferred approach due to their simplicity and reduced drug exposure for...
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications01:09

Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications

The concept of therapeutic equivalence (TE) in drugs with multiple indications is complex. A generic drug may be therapeutically equivalent to a brand-name product for one specific indication, but this doesn't necessarily mean it's equivalent for all other indications. Evidence of TE in one patient group and bioequivalence shown in healthy volunteers can support—but not confirm—TE for other indications. However, definitive proof requires individual clinical studies for each indication due to...