LAUSR

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare canal transportation and the centering ability of Reciproc (VDW, Munich, Germany), WaveOne (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland), and EdgeFile (EdgeEndo, Albuquerque, NM) rotary systems using cone‐beam computed tomographic imaging. Methods: Ninety mesiobuccal mandibular first molar uncalcified canals with at least a 19‐mm length, a canal curvature of 15°–30° (the Schneider method), and a mature apex were selected. Canals were randomly divided into 3 groups of 30 teeth, and canal preparation with the Reciproc, WaveOne, and EdgeFile systems was performed according to the manufacturers' instructions. Cone‐beam computed tomographic images were taken before and after instrumentation in the same position. Apical transportation was calculated in the distances of 2, 3, and 4 mm from the apex. Kruskal‐Wallis and Mann‐Whitney U tests were used to statistically analyze the data. Results: The mean canal transportation was significantly lower with EdgeFile (P < .001) followed by the WaveOne rotary system. Moreover, the centering ability of the EdgeFile system was higher than that of the WaveOne and Reciproc systems. Conclusions: The EdgeFile rotary system showed the lowest transportation in both the mesiodistal and buccolingual directions and the highest centering ability. The Reciproc system showed the highest transportation and the lowest centering ability.