This clinical study was undertaken to evaluate the postoperative sequelae following single-visit versus multiplevisit endodontic therapy at various interval of time in vital as well as nonvital teeth.

Thirty-two cases were randomly assigned to the following four groups, group I, group II, group III and group IV. After gaining the access to the pulp chamber, establishing the working length, thorough cleaning and shaping was done for all the cases. Obturation was done by protaper (variable taper) gutta-percha and AH-PLUS sealer using lateral and vertical condensation technique. All the cases were recalled after 48 hours, 1 week, 4 weeks and 6 weeks following obturation and were evaluated for postoperative pain, tenderness and swelling.

There was no statistically significant difference amongst all the four groups in the incidence and severity of postoperative pain, tenderness and swelling at the end of one week. However, within 48 hours groups I, II and IV showed more pain when compared to group III. And groups I, II and III showed more tenderness compared with groups IV. Postoperative swelling was not reported.

Radiographic investigation at the end of 6 weeks showed significant change in the appearance of the periapical region in group II and group IV cases.

On strict adherence to biological principles and proper case selection, no significant difference in the success, postoperative pain and tenderness exist when treated with either single-visit or multiple-visit therapy.

No significant difference in the success rate or postoperative pain, tenderness, and swelling exists when treated with either single-visit or multiple-visit endodontic therapy. Hence, one can readily integrate one-visit endodontic therapy into the routine clinical practice of dentistry.

Prashanth MB, Tavane PN, Abraham S, Chacko L. Comparative Evaluation of Pain, Tenderness and Swelling followed by Radiographic Evaluation of Periapical Changes at Various Intervals of Time following Single and Multiple Visit Endodontic Therapy: An in vivo Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011;12(3):187-191.