Summary Review/Endodontics
Evidence-Based Dentistry (2008) 9, 24. doi:10.1038/sj.ebd.6400570
Single or multiple visits for endodontic treatment?
When people need root canal treatment of permanent teeth, are single-visit treatments as effective as multiple-visit treatments?
Address for correspondence: Luisa M Fernandez Mauleffinch, Cochrane Oral Health Group, MANDEC, School of Dentistry, University of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Manchester M15 6FH, UK. E-mail: luisa.fernandez@manchester.ac.uk
Toru Naito1
1Department of General Dentistry, Fukuoka Dental College, Fukuoka, Japan
Figini L, Lodi G, Gorni F, Gagliani M. Single versus multiple visits for endodontic treatment of permanent teeth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; issue 4
Abstract
Data sources
Searches for relevant studies were made using the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, Medline and Embase. The major oral medicine journals were also searched by hand and reference lists of included studies and reviews were checked. Endodontics experts were contacted by e-mail. No language limitations were imposed.
Study Selection
Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCT of root canal treatment were included. Surgical endodontic treatment was excluded. The outcomes considered were the number of teeth extracted for endodontic problems; radiological success (absence of any periapical radiolucency) after at least 1 year; postoperative pain; painkiller use; swelling; or sinus track formation.
Data extraction and synthesis
Data were collected using a specific extraction form. The validity of the studies included was assessed on the basis of allocation concealment, blindness of the study, and loss of participants. Data were analysed by calculating risk ratios. When valid and relevant data were collected, a meta-analysis of the data was undertaken.
Results
Twelve RCT were included in the review. Four studies had a low risk of bias, four a moderate risk, and another four had a high risk of bias. The frequency of radiological success and immediate postoperative pain were not significantly different between single- and multiple-visit root canal treatments. People who had single-visit treatment reported a higher frequency of painkiller use and swelling, but the results for swelling were not significantly different between the two groups. We found no study that included tooth loss and sinus track formation among its primary outcomes.
Conclusions
No difference exists in the effectiveness of root canal treatment, in terms of radiological success, between single- and multiple-visit treatments. Most short- and long-term complications are also similar in terms of frequency, although patients undergoing a single visit may experience a slightly higher frequency of swelling and are significantly more likely to take painkillers.
