Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 274
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 Table of Contents  
CASE REPORT
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 34

Persistence of postoperative pain due to extrusion of endodontic obturator plastic carrier: A report of two cases treated with a periradicular microsurgical approach


1 Department of Biomedical Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano; Dental Clinic, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy
2 Department of Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences, Università Sapienza di Roma, Rome, Italy
3 Department of Therapeutic Dentistry, Institute of Dentistry, I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
4 Department of Oral Surgery, Institute of Dentistry, I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
5 Department of Biomedical Surgical and Dental Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano; Dental Clinic, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy; Department of Oral Surgery, Institute of Dentistry, I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia

Date of Submission13-Sep-2019
Date of Acceptance05-Mar-2020
Date of Web Publication24-May-2021

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Stefano Corbella
IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Via R. Galeazzi, 4, 20161 Milan

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.316651

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


The aim of the present study was to describe two clinical cases showing postoperative pain associated with the use of plastic carrier obturation system and apical bone fenestration. The patients were treated by surgical access and apicoectomy through a modern technique (using magnification and microsurgical approach), thus removing the direct contact between obturation material and submucosal connective tissue. The surgical interventions were carried on without the occurrence of any complication. Postsurgical adverse sequelae were negligible. After few weeks from the surgery, all symptoms disappeared. Radiographic healing was observed after 48 months. The presence of apical bone fenestration could be the cause of persistent pain after root canal treatment. The contact between plastic carrier and submucosal connective tissue could be the direct cause of spontaneous pain even in absence of periapical infection. Since the clinical diagnosis could be difficult, the use of tridimensional radiology could be justified. Surgical approach, by the removal of the contact between the carrier and connective tissues, can be considered a viable option to treat these particular affections.

Keywords: Apicoectomy, endodontics, pain, root canal obturation


How to cite this article:
Taschieri S, Gambarini G, Makeeva I, Tarasenko S, Corbella S. Persistence of postoperative pain due to extrusion of endodontic obturator plastic carrier: A report of two cases treated with a periradicular microsurgical approach. Dent Res J 2021;18:34

How to cite this URL:
Taschieri S, Gambarini G, Makeeva I, Tarasenko S, Corbella S. Persistence of postoperative pain due to extrusion of endodontic obturator plastic carrier: A report of two cases treated with a periradicular microsurgical approach. Dent Res J [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 Nov 30];18:34. Available from: https://www.drjjournal.net/text.asp?2021/18/1/34/316651




  Introduction Top


The main aim of endodontic treatment is to allow the long-term retention of teeth affected by pulpal or periradicular pathology in the absence of signs and symptoms.[1],[2] This could be obtained through the tridimensional filling and sealing of the root canal system after removal and isolation of microorganisms and pulp debris.[3],[4]

Many techniques, instruments, and materials were described in scientific literature to effectively fill root canal space.[3],[4] Gutta-percha, both thermoplasticized and cold, is commonly used in various techniques for obtaining tridimensional sealing of the root canal system.[2],[5],[6] Plastic carriers coated with gutta-percha are also widely used.[4] Other materials, such as resin cement[4] and mineral trioxide aggregate,[7],[8],[9] were adopted for apical and canal obturation with specific clinical indications.

Since ideally, the obturation material should remain confined in the root canal space, sometimes it can extrude in the periradicular area, thus provoking, in some cases, postoperative pain and discomfort.[10] Among the causes of the worsening of postoperative quality of life after extrusion of endodontic obturation materials, we can cite the inflammatory response of the periapical tissue that can cause persistent pain and postoperative flare-up.[11],[12] The extrusion of obturation material and/or endodontic sealant in the presence of particular anatomical structures, such as neurovascular bundles and periosteum, could cause significant pain.[10]

From the anatomical point of view, postoperative pain can occur after root canal treatment in the presence of apical bone fenestrations located on the buccal side of alveolar bone. In this particular situation, overfilling and extrusion of obturation material could be related to mucosal (and periosteal) irritation and consequent inflammation that cause persistent pain after treatment.[13]

In some cases, the occurrence of postoperative persisting pain could require further intervention, through a surgical approach, after a failed orthograde nonsurgical approach.

The aim of the present study was to present two cases of postoperative acute pain after orthograde endodontic treatment probably due to the extrusion of gutta-percha and/or carrier and its contact with surrounding connective tissues that were treated by a surgical approach.


  Case Reports Top


Two patients were referred to the Dental Clinic of IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi in Milan, Italy. Both the patients were informed about the treatment options and signed a written informed consent form before the intervention.

Case report 1

A 54-year-old male, classified as the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 (ASA I), complained of spontaneous pain in the second right maxillary molar (#1.7) region and a slight complaint in the same area while chewing. The pain was constant and exacerbated by finger pressure in the apical area from the buccal side. The #1.7 presented with no mobility, and it was periodontally healthy. Primary orthograde endodontic treatment was performed 6 months before.

Periapical radiographs revealed the absence of periapical lesion and a physiological periodontal ligament space [Figure 1]. Moreover, the previous endodontic treatment performed 1 year ago, appeared, at radiographic examination, adequate. The patient reported that pain occurred 1 week after the endodontic treatment. In order to acquire more information, it was decided to request a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) of the area, finding no sign of apical extrusion of obturation material and a buccal bone fenestration with the apex of the distal root outside of the buccal plate and the curved mesial root that was close to the distal. A small periapical radiolucency could be observed at the apex of the distal root [Figure 2].
Figure 1: Periapical radiograph of the #1.7 showing the presence of a periapical radiolucency.

Click here to view
Figure 2: Cone-beam computed tomography view of the teeth showing a peculiar anatomy of the mesial root near the distal one and without the presence of the buccal cortical bone in the apical region.

Click here to view


On the basis of signs and symptoms, the preliminary clinical hypothesis was of an apical longitudinal root fracture or of an extraradicular inflammation. After informing the patient, who signed a written informed consent form, it was decided to perform an exploratory flap in order to complete the diagnosis. Preoperatively, the patient was fully informed about the surgical protocol and clinical alternatives. The patient rinsed his mouth with an antiseptic mouthwash containing 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate, beginning 3 days before surgery.

The access flap was triangular, with one horizontal incision and one vertical incision, with the latter located mesial to tooth #1.4. A papilla base incision (PBI) approach was adopted, as described by Velvart.[14] Magnifying surgical loupes (×4.3) were used for better visualization during flap design and elevation. Following flap elevation, the presence of a capsulated lesion near the tooth apex was evident. After a careful removal of the inflammatory lesion, out of the mesiobuccal root apex, more than 1 mm of the plastic carrier used for the obturation was clearly visible [Figure 3]. Due to the anatomical morphology of the root canal system, in order to remove the lesion, the apexes of the involved roots were 3 mm resected at the desired angle (approximately 20°). Subsequently, a root-end cavity was prepared using zirconium nitrate micro-tip (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) driven by an ultrasonic device unit (Piezon Master 700, EMS, Nyon, Switzerland). The cavity was then dried using sterile paper points, and mineral trioxide aggregate (ProRoot MTA, DENTSPLY Tulsa Dental, Tulsa, OK, USA) was used as the root-end filling material [Figure 4]. The reflected tissues were then replaced into their original position and sutured with a nonresorbable 4-0 suture (Ethicon Inc., Piscataway, NJ, USA).
Figure 3: Clinical view before apical resection showing overfilling.

Click here to view
Figure 4: Clinical view after root-end management.

Click here to view


After surgery, the patient was advised to avoid mouth rinsing, hard and hot food, hot drinks, heavy physical activity, and toothbrushing on the day of surgery. The patient was instructed to rinse his mouth twice daily, with 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate for plaque control for 7 days. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were prescribed after the surgical procedure. Sutures were removed 5 days after surgery. The 48-month follow-up showed the resolution of spontaneous pain, the absence of other pathological signs and symptoms, and the radiographic resolution of the lesions, confirmed at 8 years follow-up [Figure 5].
Figure 5: (a) Immediate postoperative periapical radiograph. (b) Periapical radiograph after 1 year showing periapical healing. (c) Periapical radiograph after 4 years confirms periapical healing. w. Further periapical radiograph after 8 years underlined periapical healing.

Click here to view


Case report 2

A 44-year-old male, classified as ASA I, reported spontaneous mild pain, also exacerbated while chewing, located in the region of the left second maxillary premolar (#2.5), that was treated by orthograde endodontic treatment years before. The patient referred symptoms soon after the orthograde treatment of #2.5. Pain was exacerbated by finger pressure in the apical buccal area.

In this case, periapical radiograph and CBCT images showed endodontic overfilling without periapical radiolucency [Figure 6] and [Figure 7]. An apical bone fenestration was visible after tridimensional radiographic reconstruction in correspondence of the apex of the #2.5. Due to the persistence of the pain, assuming a possible periapical inflammatory reaction due to the overfilling, in agreement with the patient, it was decided to perform an exploratory flap to complete the diagnosis. Preoperatively, the patient was fully informed about the surgical protocol and clinical alternatives. The preoperative and postoperative protocol was the same applied in the case report described before. A PBI approach was adopted, with a triangular flap having one horizontal incision and one vertical incision, the latter located distally to tooth #2.3. Magnifying surgical loupes (×4.3) were used. Following flap elevation, a capsulated lesion was visible in correspondence of the apex of #2.5 [Figure 8]. After a careful removal of the lesion, it was clearly visible more than 1 mm of the plastic carrier of a carrier-based root canal obturation technique extruded [Figure 9]. Using a hot burnisher with a small round head, the extraradicular carrier was cut, and the gutta-percha was compacted [Figure 10].
Figure 6: Preoperative periapical radiograph.

Click here to view
Figure 7: Cone-beam computed tomography view showing the presence of radio-opaque overfilling.

Click here to view
Figure 8: Clinical view showing the presence of a capsulated inflammatory reaction.

Click here to view
Figure 9: Clinical view after the curettage of the lesion showing the evidence of extrusion of the plastic carrier.

Click here to view
Figure 10: Apical sealing removing the excess of the carrier and burning gutta-percha.

Click here to view


The reflected tissues were then replaced into their original position and sutured with a nonresorbable 5-0 suture (Ethicon Inc., Piscataway, NJ, USA).

The 48-month follow-up showed the complete resolution of the clinical situation [Figure 11].
Figure 11: (a) Periapical radiograph after 1 year showing good periapical healing. (b) Periapical radiograph after 4 years confirms periapical healing.

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


The two presented cases showed the resolution of the symptoms and of clinical and radiographic signs of the extrusion of the plastic carrier used for endodontic obturation, which caused periapical/periradicular inflammation. In order to remove the noxious agent, we consider that the best treatment option was represented by one surgical approach.

As for methodological issues of the present study, when evaluating the outcomes of the treatment, the reader should consider that the external validity of the results is limited by the fact that we treated just two cases.

In authors' opinion, the first issue to be addressed is about the diagnostic process. Postoperative pain is a relatively frequent occurrence after root canal treatment, as it was widely demonstrated by a number of published studies.[15],[16],[17] In most cases, the resolution of the symptoms occurred in 5–7 days and could be facilitated by the assumption of anti-inflammatory drugs and painkillers.[15] In cases of persistent pain (even mild and with sporadic exacerbation), since the causes of such symptoms could be extremely variable, the diagnosis could be difficult. In these patients, the clinical evaluation should include periodontal probing, in order to detect, in particular cases, the presence of deep and narrow bone defects that could be usually related to the presence of one vertical root fracture[18] or, in general, one periodontal pocket. In the absence of periodontal pockets of more than 4 mm, palpation and a slight hand pressure can help to identify the presence of an apical inflammation.[19],[20] In the cases described, palpation deep in the vestibulum has given precise indications about the position of the apex, located outside the cortical plate.

In one case, periapical radiographs allowed to identify the presence of a periapical radiolucency, but periapical radiographs allowed to easily identify the presence, in one of the described cases, of a periapical radiolucency, but at the same time, it was not able to show the extrusion of the plastic carrier from the apical foramen.[21] Tridimensional radiography (CBCT) was, on the contrary, able to detect easily the extrusion of the gutta-percha used for root canal obturation and allowed to understand the anatomical tridimensional relationship between the root apex and the cortical bone.[22],[23]

Since, in both the presented cases, an orthograde approach was judged to be not feasible or not indicated in the presence of adequate tridimensional root filling (evaluated through periapical radiographs) and there was the need of a direct visualization to complete the diagnostic process, a surgical approach was chosen and performed.

The periapical surgery approach that was adopted in the described case reports included the use of magnification devices, accurate soft tissue, and root apex management. In the cases described, the endodontic surgical approach served primarily to allow a direct visualization of the root ends for diagnosis, and this was the reason why we designed relatively large surgical flaps.

Since the extrusion of the plastic carrier from the apical foramen was described, in literature, to be a relatively frequent occurrence (with a prevalence of up to 80%, as it was reported by Tennert in 2013 ),[24] it could be hypothesized that it can represent one of the causes of the postoperative pain sensation.[25] As for the subjects treated in the described case reports, pain was perceived for months and, even though it presented clinically different as compared to immediate postoperative pain, we can postulate that the cause of such sensation was but the contact between the extruded plastic carrier and the periosteum. Even though we decided to avoid a histologic analysis that could have confirmed the direct contact between the plastic carrier and periosteal tissues, the direct visualization of such portion seemed to support this hypothesis.

In similar cases, when a fenestration in the apical bone is present, other authors demonstrated that a surgical approach that included the removal of the apical portion of the root could be a viable treatment option and led to the resolution of the clinical signs and symptoms.

However, to our knowledge, we could not find in scientific literature other studies about this particular situation that can be probably considered relatively common.

Despite the limitations of the present study, endodontic surgery could be successfully applied for the resolution of a nonspecific clinical situation, showing the presence of plastic carrier extrusion and apical inflammation due to the absence of cortical plate. More studies are needed in order to confirm the hypothesis the authors made to justify the treatment and to explain the resolution of the clinical cases.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient(s) has/have given his/her/their consent for his/her/their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patients understand that their names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare that they have no conflicts of interest, real or perceived, financial or nonfinancial in this article.



 
  References Top

1.
Friedman S. Prognosis of initial endodontic therapy. Endod Topics 2002;2:59-88.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Schilder H. Filling root canals in three dimensions. Dent Clin North Am 1967;723-44.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Orstavik D. Materials used for root canal obturation: Technical, biological and clinical testing. Endod Topics 2005;12:25-38.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Tomson RM, Polycarpou N, Tomson PL. Contemporary obturation of the root canal system. Br Dent J 2014;216:315-22.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Peng L, Ye L, Tan H, Zhou X. Outcome of root canal obturation by warm gutta-percha versus cold lateral condensation: A meta-analysis. J Endod 2007;33:106-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Elkerton W. A review of four gutta-percha obturation techniques. J Can Dent Assoc 1984;50:906-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Parirokh M, Torabinejad M. Mineral trioxide aggregate: A comprehensive literature review–Part III: Clinical applications, drawbacks, and mechanism of action. J Endod 2010;36:400-13.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Torabinejad M, Parirokh M. Mineral trioxide aggregate: A comprehensive literature review–part II: Leakage and biocompatibility investigations. J Endod 2010;36:190-202.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Parirokh M, Torabinejad M. Mineral trioxide aggregate: A comprehensive literature review–Part I: Chemical, physical, and antibacterial properties. J Endod 2010;36:16-27.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Rosen E, Goldberger T, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M, Corbella S, Tsesis I. The prognosis of altered sensation after extrusion of root canal filling materials: A systematic review of the literature. J Endod 2016;42:873-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Siqueira JF Jr., Rôças IN, Favieri A, Machado AG, Gahyva SM, Oliveira JC, et al. Incidence of postoperative pain after intracanal procedures based on an antimicrobial strategy. J Endod 2002;28:457-60.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Matusow RJ. The flare-up phenomenon in endodontics: A clinical perspective and review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1988;65:750-3.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Boucher Y, Sobel M, Sauveur G. Persistent pain related to root canal filling and apical fenestration: A case report. J Endod 2000;26:242-4.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Velvart P. Papilla base incision: A new approach to recession-free healing of the interdental papilla after endodontic surgery. Int Endod J 2002;35:453-60.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Pasqualini D, Corbella S, Alovisi M, Taschieri S, Del Fabbro M, Migliaretti G, et al. Postoperative quality of life following single-visit root canal treatment performed by rotary or reciprocating instrumentation: A randomized clinical trial. Int Endod J 2016;49:1030-9.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Pasqualini D, Mollo L, Scotti N, Cantatore G, Castellucci A, Migliaretti G, et al. Postoperative pain after manual and mechanical glide path: A randomized clinical trial. J Endod 2012;38:32-6.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Sathorn C, Parashos P, Messer H. The prevalence of postoperative pain and flare-up in single- and multiple-visit endodontic treatment: A systematic review. Int Endod J 2008;41:91-9.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Tsesis I, Rosen E, Tamse A, Taschieri S, Kfir A. Diagnosis of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth based on clinical and radiographic indices: A systematic review. J Endod 2010;36:1455-8.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Iqbal M, Kim S, Yoon F. An investigation into differential diagnosis of pulp and periapical pain: A PennEndo database study. J Endod 2007;33:548-51.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Gutmann JL, Baumgartner JC, Gluskin AH, Hartwell GR, Walton RE. Identify and define all diagnostic terms for periapical/periradicular health and disease states. J Endod 2009;35:1658-74.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Gutmann JL, Saunders WP, Saunders EM, Nguyen L. A assessment of the plastic Thermafil obturation technique. Part 1. Radiographic evaluation of adaptation and placement. Int Endod J 1993;26:173-8.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Kruse C, Spin-Neto R, Reibel J, Wenzel A, Kirkevang LL. Diagnostic validity of periapical radiography and CBCT for assessing periapical lesions that persist after endodontic surgery. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017;46:20170210.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Patel S, Dawood A, Ford TP, Whaites E. The potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problems. Int Endod J 2007;40:818-30.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Tennert C, Jungback IL, Wrbas KT. Comparison between two thermoplastic root canal obturation techniques regarding extrusion of root canal filling--a retrospective in vivo study. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(2):449-54.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Alonso-Ezpeleta LO, Gasco-Garcia C, Castellanos-Cosano L, Martin-Gonzalez J, Lopez-Frias FJ, Segura-Egea JJ. Postoperative pain after one-visit root-canal treatment on teeth with vital pulps: comparison of three different obturation techniques. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012;17(4):e721-7.  Back to cited text no. 25
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9], [Figure 10], [Figure 11]



 

Top
 
 
Search
Similar in PUBMED
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Case Reports
Discussion
References
Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed514    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded117    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal