A Randomized Clinical Trial on Oral and Transdermal Diclofenac on Controlling Postoperative Endodontic Pain
Corresponding Author: Saravana Arun Kumar, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics Mahatma Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences, Puducherry, India, Phone: +91 9566668036, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on: 19 July 2022; Accepted on: 29 December 2022; Published on: 02 March 2023
Aim: To compare the effect of analgesics on postoperative pain following single-visit root canal treatment in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis.
Materials and methods: In this randomized controlled clinical trial, 80 patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis of posterior teeth without any signs and symptoms of acute or chronic apical periodontitis and moderate to severe pain were divided into four groups of 20 patients each enrolled in this study. They are group I, pretreatment oral diclofenac; group II, pretreatment transdermal diclofenac; group III, posttreatment oral diclofenac; and group IV, posttreatment transdermal diclofenac. Immediately a single-visit root canal treatment is performed. The intensity of the pain was scored based on a 10-point visual analogue scores (VAS) before and after treatment for up to 24 hours postoperatively. Data were submitted for statistical analysis. Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to compare the pain scores between the four groups and the Mann–Whitney U test to test the significance between the groups.
Result: At 24 hours interval postoperative after drug administration, the intensity of the pain was lower when compared to baseline values. Group IV showed significant results at 24 hours when compared to group III; no significant difference was seen between groups I and III.
Conclusion: The results demonstrate that a posttreatment transdermal patch may be more effective than oral diclofenac for the management of postoperative endodontic pain.
How to cite this article: Murugan B, Kumar SA, Srinivasan K, et al. A Randomized Clinical Trial on Oral and Transdermal Diclofenac on Controlling Postoperative Endodontic Pain. CODS J Dent 2022;14(1):6-10.
Source of support: Nil
Conflict of interest: None
Keywords: Diclofenac patch, Diclofenac transdermal patch, Irreversible pulpitis, Postoperative endodontic pain, Single-visit root canal treatment.
Diclofenac is the most commonly given nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), which has anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antipyretic properties.
Recently, diclofenac transdermal patches have been developed as an innovative topical drug delivery system, offering the advantage of using sustained drug delivery5 with fewer incidences of systemic adverse effects due to low plasma concentrations.
The study was done to measure postoperative endodontic pain using oral and transdermal diclofenac transdermal patches.
The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to investigate the pretreatment and posttreatment analgesia effect of the tab. Diclofenac and the transdermal patch of diclofenac for controlling postoperative pain in patients with irreversible pulpitis cases.
Evaluate postoperative endodontic pain after 24 hours.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Selection of cases—a total of 80 patients participated in the controlled clinical trial that was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee and consent from the participants.
Patients were selected based on the following criteria:
Inclusion criteria as follows:
18–45 years of age.
Informed consent was obtained.
Exclusion criteria are as follows:
<18 years and >45 years.
Allergic to NSAIDs.
Patients taking analgesic <12 hours.
A pilot study was performed on 40 patients by means of the one-way analysis of variance using G*Power 3.2 version. Moderate to severe pain patients were selected for the study.
The pilot study resulted in a total sample size of 80 cases (n = 20). A total of 20 patients for each group.
The clinical trial has been registered with the Scientific Review Board with reference number SRB/SDMDS11/18/ENDO/06. After an explanation of the treatment procedures, each patient was anesthetized with 2 mL of lidocaine, followed by isolation and canal opening. Cleaning and shaping were done using the passive step-back technique to enlarge the canal to a minimum apical size of #35 file or larger, depending on the size of the canal. Sodium hypochlorite (2.5%) and normal saline were used as irrigants.
Finally, canals were dried with paper points and obturated using gutta-percha cones and AH Plus sealers. Each patient was provided with a postoperative pain questionnaire having VAS. Patients were encouraged to make immediate postoperative pain measurements (0 h), once treatment is over in order to ensure patient understanding of the pain questionnaire.
Patients who signed the informed consent were randomly divided into four groups, patients receiving oral diclofenac 50 mg and transdermal diclofenac. The block randomization was done by using a computer-generated randomization block by a trained dentist who was blinded. Following the completion of root canal treatment, the investigator collected the forms; the drugs were administered. The root canal treatment was done by a single operator after their training and calibration. Strict instructions, however, were given to the patients not to take the rescue medication until first speaking with the investigator. They were then requested to take the rescue if the medication was not taken by the patient and was told to return it at their next appointment.
Transdermal Patch Application
Prepare and clean the skin to remove any dirt, lotions, oils, or powders. Clean the skin using warm water alone or with a clear soap.
Take the patch out of the packaging.
Place the patch, sticky side down, onto the clean area of skin.
Complication of Transdermal Patch
Moderate irritation, itching, or redness at the application site may also occur.
The diclofenac epolamine topical patch (patch, 10 × 14 cm; Pfizer Inc., New York, United States of America) is a topical patch containing 1.33% diclofenac epolamine.
|Trade names||Content of the medication||Groups||Manufacturers|
|Tablet diclofenac 50 mg||Diethylamine||Group I||Micro labs Limited, Bangalore, India|
|Transdermal diclofenac patch||Diclofenac diethylamine 100 mg, excipients||Group II||Zuventus Healthcare, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India|
|Tablet diclofenac 50 mg||Diethylamine||Group III||Micro labs Limited, Bangalore, Karnataka, India|
|Transdermal diclofenac patch||Diclofenac diethylamine 100 mg, excipients||Group IV||Zuventus Healthcare, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India|
The Normality tests, Kolmogorov–Smirnov, and Shapiro–Wilk test results reveal that all variables do not follow a normal distribution. Therefore, nonparametric tests were applied to analyze the data.
Data was entered in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (version 21).
For the test, a p-value of < 0.05 is to be considered statistically significant.
Descriptive analysis was performed.
Wilcoxon signed-rank test—to assess the difference between the pretreatment and posttreatment VAS scores within the treatment groups.
Kruskal–Wallis test—to compare the difference in the pretreatment and posttreatment VAS scores between the treatment groups.
Table 1 depicts the visual analogue scores (VAS) among various groups pre and posttreatment. The mean VAS score was recorded pre and posttreatment among the study subjects in all the groups. The highest mean VAS pretreatment was recorded in study subjects belonging to group IV (7.90 ± 0.87). However, the highest mean VAS posttreatment were recorded in study subjects belonging to group I (3.70 ± 0.67).
|VAS score||Group I||Group II||Group III||Group IV|
|Pretreatment||7.60 ± 1.17||7.60 ± 0.96||7.60 ± 0.69||7.90 ± 0.87|
|Posttreatment||3.70 ± 0.67||3.40 ± 0.51||2.60 ± 0.69||2.50 ± 0.52|
Table 2 depicts the comparison of mean VAS pre and posttreatment within the treatment groups. The difference in mean VAS score between pre and posttreatment was the highest for group IV (5.40 ± 1.07), followed by group III (5.00 ± 1.15), group II (4.20 ± 0.91), and the least reduction was found in the group I (3.90 ± 1.28). However, the differences between the VAS score pre and posttreatment in all the groups were highly significant (p < 0.05), indicating a significant pain reduction across all four groups.
|Group||VAS score [mean ± standard deviation (SD)]||Mean difference||Z-value||p-value|
|Group I||7.60 ± 1.17||3.70 ± 0.67||3.90 ± 1.28||−2.829||0.005|
|Group II||7.60 ± 0.96||3.40 ± 0.51||4.20 ± 0.91||−2.850||0.004|
|Group III||7.60 ± 0.69||2.60 ± 0.69||5.00 ± 1.15||−2.825||0.005|
|Group IV||7.90 ± 0.87||2.50 ± 0.52||5.40 ± 1.07||−2.827||0.005|
p-value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant; Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Table 3 depicts the comparison of pre and posttreatment mean VASs among the treatment groups. The highest mean VAS pretreatment was recorded in study subjects belonging to group IV (7.90 ± 0.87) when compared to the other three groups. However, there was no significant difference in the pretreatment VAS scores across the four groups. The highest mean VAS posttreatment were recorded in study subjects belonging to group I (3.70 ± 0.67), indicating the least reduction in pain when compared to the other three groups. The difference between the posttreatment VAS scores across the four groups was statistically highly significant.
|VAS score (mean ± SD)||Groups||Chi-square||p-value|
|Group I||Group II||Group III||Group IV|
|Pretreatment||7.60 ± 1.17||7.60 ± 0.96||7.60 ± 0.69||7.90 ± 0.87||0.708||0.871|
|Posttreatment||3.70 ± 0.67||3.40 ± 0.51||2.60 ± 0.69||2.50 ± 0.52||17.349||0.001|
p-value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant; p-value < 0.001 is considered statistically highly significant; Kruskal–Wallis test
Pretreatment pairwise comparisons were not made because Kruskal–Wallis test did show any statistically significant difference between the pretreatment VAS scores of the groups.
Table 4 depicts the pairwise comparisons of mean VASs between the treatment groups posttreatment. The difference between the posttreatment VAS scores of group I vs II and group III vs IV showed no significant difference. This indicates that there is no significant difference in the effect of these groups on posttreatment pain.
|VAS score||Groups||Mean difference||Chi-square||p-value|
|Posttreatment||Group I vs II||0.30 ± 1.05||3.450||0.47|
|Group I vs III||1.10 ± 1.10||15.050||0.002|
|Group I vs IV||1.20 ± 0.91||16.500||0.001|
|Group II vs III||0.80 ± 0.91||11.600||0.017|
|Group II vs IV||0.90 ± 0.73||13.050||0.007|
|Group III vs IV||0.10 ± 0.56||1.450||0.76|
Pairwise comparisons—Kruskal–Wallis test; p-value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant; p-value < 0.001 is considered statistically highly significant
There were significant differences in the posttreatment VAS of group I vs III and group I vs IV. Group III and IV had lesser VAS score posttreatment, indicating a superior effect on pain reduction when compared to group I. Similarly, group II vs III and group II vs IV showed a significant difference in the VAS scores posttreatment. Groups III and IV were significantly superior in their effect to reduce pain posttreatment when compared to group II.
Figure 1 depicts the pretreatment mean VASs among the treatment groups. The highest mean VAS pretreatment was recorded in study subjects belonging to group IV (7.90 ± 0.87) when compared to the other three groups.
However, there was no significant difference in the pretreatment VAS scores across the four groups.
Figure 2 depicts the posttreatment mean VASs among the treatment groups. The highest mean VAS posttreatment were recorded in study subjects belonging to group I (3.70 ± 0.67), indicating the least reduction in pain when compared to the other three groups. The difference between the posttreatment VAS scores across the four groups was statistically highly significant.
Figure 3 depicts the comparison of mean VASs pre and posttreatment within the treatment groups. The difference in mean VAS score between pre and posttreatment was the highest for group IV (5.40 ± 1.07), followed by group III (5.00 ± 1.15), group II (4.20 ± 0.91), and the least reduction was found in group I (3.90 ± 1.28). However, the differences between the VAS score pre and posttreatment in all the groups were highly significant (p < 0.05), indicating a significant pain reduction across all four groups.
Protocols for assessing endodontic pain differ from oral surgery models in several respects. Patients in need of endodontic treatment might have different systemic conditions and might vary in age or the degree of pulpal pathology; these factors could introduce bias into a study.
Periapical anatomy is another important factor that can lead to different inflammatory responses after root canal therapy. Thus, the evaluation of analgesic and anti-inflammatory drugs in oral surgical procedures cannot be directly extrapolated for determining the appropriate approach to treat endodontic pain.
This was one of the pioneer studies to use a preoperative single oral dose of diclofenac sodium for the control and prevention of postendodontic pain. Oral administration was preferred because the technique is clinically effective and convenient; the use of intramuscular or intravenous injection may lead to discomfort and fear and is not well accepted by some patients.1-8
Most patients and dentists would prefer to provide an anti-inflammatory agent to be taken immediately before or self-administered as needed by the patient after anesthesia has worn off. However, in the present research, diclofenac sodium was administered 30 minutes before the conventional root canal therapy. The primary mechanism responsible for its anti-inflammatory, antipyretic, and analgesic actions is the inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis by the inhibition of cyclooxygenase. Diclofenac may also be a unique member of the NSAIDs. There is some evidence that diclofenac inhibits the lipoxygenase pathways, thus reducing formation of the leukotrienes (also pro-inflammatory autacoids).
However, there are few clinical trials (involving endodontic and oral surgery procedures) that evaluate the optimal moment for oral analgesic/anti-inflammatory agent administration. Certain studies report preoperative prescriptions ranging in duration from 1 to 12 hours.5-18 This randomized trial allowed sufficient comparison between groups. The sample was distributed similarly regarding age, gender, and teeth to avoid bias. Although certain studies have shown a relationship between preoperative and postoperative pain.11,19-26
Further, future clinical trials are required to show the efficacy of pretreatment analgesics to prevent postendodontic pain.
Posttreatment transdermal decreased postoperative endodontic pain when compared to pretreatment and posttreatment oral diclofenac at 24 hours. Pretreatment transdermal diclofenac showed significantly higher VAS scores compared to other groups. Suggest that pretreatment transdermal diclofenac might not have a high affinity for the inflammatory components of endodontic pain in comparison to posttreatment transdermal. None of the medications showed any higher incidence of side effects and were relatively safe.
1. Smith EA, Marshall JG, Selph SS, et al. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for managing postoperative endodontic pain in patients who present with preoperative pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2017;43(1):7–15. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.09.010
2. Suneelkumar C, Subha A, Gogala D. Effect of preoperative corticosteroids in patients with symptomatic pulpitis on postoperative pain after single-visit root canal treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2018;44(9):1347–1354. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.05.015
3. Nagendrababu V, Gutmann JL. Factors associated with postobturation pain following single-visit nonsurgical root canal treatment: a systematic review. Quintessence Int 2017;48(3):193–208. DOI:10.3290/j.qi.a36894
4. Nath R, Daneshmand A, Sizemore D, et al. Efficacy of corticosteroids for postoperative endodontic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Anesth Pain Med 2018;18(4):205–221. DOI:10.17245/jdapm.2018.18.4.205
5. Shamszadeh S, Shirvani A, Eghbal MJ, et al. Efficacy of corticosteroids on postoperative endodontic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endod 2018;44(7):1057–1065. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.03.010
7. Ng YL, Glennon JP, Setchell DJ, et al. Prevalence of and factors affecting post-obturation pain in patients undergoing root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2004;37(6):381–391. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2004.00820.x
8. Nagendrababu V, Pulikkotil SJ, Jinatongthai P, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral premedication on pain after nonsurgical root canal treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endod 2019;45(4):364–371. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2018.10.016
11. Arslan H, Topcuoglu HS, Aladag H. Effectiveness of tenoxicam and ibuprofen for pain prevention following endodontic therapy in comparison to placebo: a randomized double-blind clinical trial. J Oral Sci. 2011;53(2):157–161. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.53.157
12. Ramazani M, Hamidi MR, Moghaddamnia AA, et al. The prophylactic effects of zintoma and ibuprofen on post-endodontic pain of molars with irreversible pulpitis: a randomized clinical trial. Iran Endod J 2013;8(3):129–134.
13. Mokhtari F, Yazdi K, Mahabadi AM, et al. Effect of premedication with indomethacin and ibuprofen on postoperative endodontic pain: a clinical trial. Iran Endod J 2016;11(1):57–62. DOI: 10.7508/iej.2016.01.011
14. Konagala RK, Mandava J, Pabbati RK, et al. Effect of pretreatment medication on postendodontic pain: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Conserv Dent 2019;22(1):54–58. DOI:10.4103/JCD.JCD_135_18
15. Akhlaghi N, Azarshab M, Akhoundi N, et al. The effect of ketorolac buccal infiltration on postoperative endodontic pain: a prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Quintessence Int 2019;50(7):540–546. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a42654
16. Praveen R, Thakur S, Kirthiga M. Comparative evaluation of premedication with ketorolac and prednisolone on postendodontic pain: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. J Endod 2017;43(5):667–673. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.12.012
17. Glassman G, Krasner P, Morse DR, et al. A prospective randomized double-blind trial on efficacy of dexamethasone for endodontic interappointment pain in teeth with asymptomatic inflamed pulps. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989;67(1):96–100. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(89)90310-1
18. Pochapski MT, Santos FA, de Andrade ED, et al. Effect of pretreatment dexamethasone on postendodontic pain. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2009;108(5):790–795. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.05.014
19. Sharma N, Nikhil V, Gupta S. Effect of preoperative administration of steroid with different routes on post endodontic pain: a randomized placebo controlled clinical trial. Endodontology 2015;27(2):107–112.
20. Mehrvarzfar P, Esnashari E, Salmanzadeh R, et al. Effect of dexamethasone intraligamentary injection on post-endodontic pain in patients with symptomatic irreversible pulpitis: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Iran Endod J 2016;11(4):261–266. DOI: 10.22037/iej.2016.2
21. Yavari HR, Jafari F, Jamloo H, et al. The effect of submucosal injection of corticosteroids on pain perception and quality of life after root canal treatment of teeth with irreversible pulpitis: a randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2019;45(5):477–482. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2019.01.005
22. Jalalzadeh SM, Mamavi A, Shahriari S, et al. Effect of pretreatment prednisolone on postendodontic pain: a double-blind parallel-randomized clinical trial. J Endod. 2010;36(6):978–981. DOI:10.1016/j.joen.2010.03.015
24. Aminoshariae A, Kulild JC, Donaldson M, et al. Evidence-based recommendations for analgesic efficacy to treat pain of endodontic origin: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Am Dent Assoc 2016;147(10):826–839. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2016.05.010
25. Siqueira JF Jr, Rôças IN, Favieri A, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod 2002;28(6):457–460. DOI: 10.1097/00004770-200206000-00010
© The Author(s). 2022 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.