Logo-jida

Submitted: 31 Jan 2026
Revision: 26 Apr 2026
Accepted: 19 May 2026
ePublished: 26 Sep 2026
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)

J Iran Dent Assoc. 2026;38(3-4): 116-141.
doi: 10.34172/jida.2328
  Abstract View: 117128
  PDF Download: 57722

Review Article

Decoding Post-Endodontic Pain: Mapping Patient, Procedural, and Operator Determinants of Early Pain and Flare-Ups : A Scoping Review

Somayeh Majidi ORCID logo, Sholeh Ghabraei ORCID logo, Hadi Assadian* ORCID logo
*Corresponding Author: Email: hd.asdn@scident.ir

Abstract

Background: Post-endodontic pain (PEP) is a frequent outcome of root canal treatment and an important determinant of patient satisfaction and clinical decision-making. Although numerous in-vivo studies have evaluated the effects of tooth type, pulp status, anatomy, instrumentation, irrigation, obturation techniques, sealer selection, and operator-related factors, the evidence remains fragmented and sometimes conflicting. This inconsistency largely reflects heterogeneity in study design, pain assessment methods, follow-up intervals, and reporting standards. A scoping review is therefore warranted to map existing evidence and identify research gaps. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Eligible studies included human in-vivo randomized clinical trials, observational studies, and relevant reviews reporting postoperative pain following non-surgical primary root canal treatment or retreatment. In-vitro and animal studies, case reports, conference abstracts, surgical endodontic procedures, pediatric studies, non-English publications, and studies lacking validated pain outcomes were excluded. Data were charted to explore associations between diagnosis, anatomy, procedural protocols, obturation and sealer selection, irrigation strategies, operator factors, and pain assessment methods. Results: PEP was most strongly associated with preoperative pain, symptomatic irreversible pulpitis, molar anatomy, and retreatment complexity. Procedural variables—such as instrumentation kinematics, number of visits, obturation techniques, and irrigant activation—showed no consistent differences when properly executed. Bioceramic sealers were associated with slightly lower early postoperative pain than epoxy-resin sealers, though differences diminished within 48–72 hours. Operator experience and procedural accuracy significantly influenced outcomes. Pain assessment methods varied widely, with inconsistent reporting. Conclusion: PEP is a multifactorial outcome driven primarily by preoperative inflammation, anatomy, and procedural control rather than isolated technical choices. Future studies should emphasize standardized pain assessment, consistent reporting of analgesic use, and well-controlled multicenter trials.
First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Comments
Security code


Abstract View:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.


Full Text View:

Your browser does not support the canvas element.