The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Comparative Evaluation of Canal-shaping Abilities of RaceEvo, R-Motion, Reciproc Blue, and ProTaper Gold NiTi Rotary File Systems: A CBCT Study

Mohammed Mustafa

Keywords : Canal-centering ability, Canal transportation, Cone-beam computed tomography, Continuous rotation, ProTaper Gold, RaceEvo, R-Motion, Reciproc Blue, Reciprocating motion

Citation Information : Mustafa M. Comparative Evaluation of Canal-shaping Abilities of RaceEvo, R-Motion, Reciproc Blue, and ProTaper Gold NiTi Rotary File Systems: A CBCT Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (12):1406-1412.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3217

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 10-05-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Aim: To evaluate the canal transportation, canal-centering ability, and touched and untouched surfaces of the root canal dentin after instrumentation with various newer file systems in continuous rotation and reciprocating motion using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging. Materials and methods: This in vitro study was conducted on one hundred recently extracted human mandibular molars, which were selected and instrumented using the following rotary NiTi file systems: RaceEvo, R-Motion, Reciproc Blue, and ProTaper Gold. The canal preparations for all four (04) experimental groups were done according to the manufacturer's instructions; the CBCT imaging was done for all the teeth compared at different levels of 2 mm, 5 mm, 8 mm from the apex, before and after the canal preparations. The data thus collected were evaluated for variation where p <0.05 was calibrated as significant using “ANOVA and Mann–Whitney” statistical tests. Result: When the file systems were compared at different levels of the canal i.e. 2 mm, 5 mm, 8 mm from the apex, we observed a statistically significant difference for all the experimental groups (p = 0.021, 0.023, 0.032) respectively for the canal transportation (CT), (p = 0.045, 0.040, 0.037) respectively for the canal centering ability (CCA), (p <0.001) respectively for the touched (TS) and untouched (US) surfaces. R-Motion showed the least CT, greater CCA, with maximum TS, and the least US dentinal surfaces in the root canal preparations followed by RaceEvo, Reciproc Blue, and ProTaper Gold. Conclusion: R-Motion exhibited better canal centering ability, lower canal transportation due to its improved cutting efficiency down to the apex while preserving the dentin of the root canal walls and also exhibits lesser stress on dentin. The newer rotary file systems of R-Motion and RaceEvo described in this study could be recommended for clinical use during endodontic treatment. Clinical significance: The newly introduced R-Motion and RaceEvo showed better preparations of the root canal compared to other file systems and could be used as a reliable alternative to the ProTaper file systems which is considered as the gold standard in rotary endodontics.

  1. Ali A, Saraf P, Kamatagi L, et al. Comparative assessment of canal transportation, dentin loss, and remaining root filling material by different retreatment files: An in vitro cross-sectional study. Contemp Clin Dent 2021;12(1):14–20. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_31_20.
  2. Arruda EDS, Sponchiado-Júnior EC, Pandolfo MT, et al. Apical transportation and centering ability after root canal filling removal using reciprocating and continuous rotary systems: A CBCT study. Eur J Dent 2019;13(4):613–618. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3399407.
  3. Drukteinis S, Peciuliene V, Dummer PMH, Hupp J. Shaping ability of BioRace, ProTaper NEXT and Genius nickel-titanium instruments in curved canals of mandibular molars: a MicroCT study. Int Endod J 2019 Jan;52(1):86–93. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12961.
  4. Chaudhary NR, Singh DJ, Somani R, et al. Comparative evaluation of efficiency of different file systems in terms of remaining dentin thickness using cone-beam computed tomography: An In vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2018;9(3):367–371. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_72_18.
  5. Available from:
  6. Available from:
  7. Elnaghy AM, Elsaka SE. Shaping ability of ProTaper Gold and ProTaper Universal files by using cone-beam computed tomography. Ind J Dent Res 2016;27:37–41. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.179812.
  8. Yared G. Reciproc blue: the new generation of reciprocation. Giornale Italiano di Endodonzia 2017;31(2):96–101. DOI: 10.1016/j.gien.2017.09.003.
  9. Islam A, Ünsal G, Almashharawi, A. Canal transportation and volumetric dentin removal abilities of Ni-Ti rotary file systems in curved primary root canals: CBCT study. Appl Sci 2021;11:9053. DOI: 10.3390/app11199053.
  10. Berutti E, Chiandussi G, Paolino DS, et al. Canal shaping with WaveOne primary reciprocating files and ProTaper system: A comparative study. J Endod 2012;38:505–509. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2011.12.040.
  11. Almohareb RA, Barakat R, Albakri A, et al. Effect of autoclaving cycles on the cyclic fatigue resistance of Race and Race Evo nickel-titanium endodontic rotary files: An in vitro study. Metals 2021; 11(12):1947. DOI: 10.3390/met11121947.
  12. Schneider SW. A comparison of canal preparations in straight and curved root canals. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1971;32:271–275. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(71)90230-1.
  13. Üstün Y, Topçuoğlu H S, Düzgün S, Kesim B. The effect of reciprocation versus rotational movement on the incidence of root defects during retreatment procedures. Int Endod J 2015;48(10):952–958. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12387.
  14. Naseri M, Paymanpour P, Kangarloo A, et al. Influence of motion pattern on apical transportation and centering ability of WaveOne single-file technique in curved root canals. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2016;13(1):13–17. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.174690.
  15. Alrahabi M, Alkady A. Comparison of root canal apical transportation associated with Wave ONE, ProTaper Next, TF, and OneShape nickel-titanium instruments in curved canals of extracted teeth: A radiographic evaluation. Saudi J Dent Res 2017;8:14. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjdr.2017.01.001.
  16. Gogulnath D, Rajan RM, Arathy G, et al. A comparative evaluation of the canal centering ability of three rotary nickel-titanium retreatment systems in the mesio-buccal canals of mandibular first molars using computed tomography. J Conserv Dent 2015;18:310–314. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.159735.
  17. Hage W, Zogheib C, Bukiet F, et al. Canal transportation and centring ability of Reciproc and Reciproc Blue with or without use of glide path instruments: A CBCT study. Eur Endod J 2020;5(2):118–122. DOI: 10.14744/eej.2019.86570.
  18. Hoppe CB, Böttcher DE, Just AM, et al. Comparison of curved root canals preparation using reciprocating, continuous and an association of motions. Scanning 2016;38:462–468. DOI: 10.1002/sca.21297.
  19. de Carvalho GM, Sponchiado Junior EC, Garrido AD, et al. Apical transportation, centering ability, and cleaning effectiveness of reciprocating single-file system associated with different glide path techniques. J Endod 2015;41(12):2045–2049. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2015.09.005.
  20. Česaitienė G, Venskutonis T, Mačiulskienė V, et al. Micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) evaluation of effects of different rotary glide path techniques on canal transportation and centering in curved root canals. Med Sci Monit 2019;25:6351–6358. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.916112.
  21. Saleh AM, Vakili Gilani P, Tavanafar S, et al. Shaping ability of 4 different single-file systems in simulated S-shaped canals. J Endod 2015;41:54852. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2014.11.019.
  22. Martins MP, Duarte MA, Cavenago BC, et al. Effectiveness of the ProTaper Next and Reciproc systems in removing root canal filling material with sonic or ultrasonic irrigation: A micro-computed tomographic study. J Endod 2017;43(3):467–471. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.10.040.
  23. Jainaen A, Mahakunakorn N, Arayatrakullikit U, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of curved root canals prepared using reciprocal rotary files and rotational rotary files. J Conserv Dent 2018;21(1):32–36. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_258_16.
  24. Keskin, Cangul & Sarıyılmaz, Evren & Demiral, et al. Shaping ability of Reciproc Blue reciprocating instruments with or without glide path in simulated S-shaped root canals. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects 2018;12: 63–67. DOI: 10.15171/joddd.2018.010.
  25. Mamede-Neto I, Borges AH, Guedes OA, et al. Root canal transportation and centering ability of Nickel-Titanium rotary instruments in mandibular premolars assessed using cone-beam computed tomography. Open Dent J 2017;11:71–78. DOI: 10.2174/1874210601711010071.
  26. Miró GB, Tomazinho FSF, Pelissier E, et al. Comparison of canal transportation and centering ability of ProGlider and WaveOne gold glider in curved canals. Eur J Dent 2020;14(4): 639–643. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1715780.
  27. Zuolo ML, Zaia AA, Belladonna FG, et al. Micro-CT assessment of the shaping ability of four root canal instrumentation systems in oval-shaped canals. Int Endod J 2018;51:564–571. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12810.
  28. Moukhtar TM, Darrag AM, Shaheen NA. Centering ability and canal transportation of curved root canals after using different nickel–titanium preparation systems. Tanta Dent J. 2018;15:19–26. DOI: 10.4103/tdj.tdj_45_17.
  29. Pinheiro SR, Alcalde MP, Vivacqua-Gomes N, et al. Evaluation of apical transportation and centering ability of five thermally treated NiTi rotary systems. Int Endod J 2018;51:705–731. DOI: 10.1111/iej.12881
  30. Rashid AA, Saleh AM. Shaping ability of different endodontic single-file systems using simulated resin blocks. Ind J Multidiscip Dent 2016;6:61–67. DOI: 10.4103/2229-6360.197745.
  31. Prabhakar AR, Yavagal C, Dixit K, et al. Reciprocating vs rotary instrumentation in pediatric endodontics: Cone beam computed tomographic analysis of deciduous root canals using two single-file systems. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9:45–49. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1332.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.