Randomized trial compares cleaning and shaping abilities of two rotary files in human molars, suggesting clinical effectiveness.
Objectives: the aim of the study was to compare the shaping and cleaning abilities of Race Evo and VDW. Rotate rotary files in extracted human mandibular molars. Materials and Methods: Sixty mesiobuccal canals, in mandibular first molars, with moderate curvature (15°–30°) were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 30): Group A (Race Evo #25/.04) and Group B (VDW.Rotate #25/.04). Shaping ability was assessed using CBCT at 3, 6, and 9 mm from apex, and cleaning efficacy was evaluated histologically by quantifying residual debris. Data were analyzed with a significance set at p ≤ 0.05. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests have been applied for intra- and intergroup comparisons of image analysis results in cleaning assessment. Chi-square test assessed differences in canal transportation and centering. Results: Both systems-maintained canal anatomy within acceptable limits. VDW. Rotate exhibited better centering, whereas Race Evo showed fewer residual debris, with no significant differences between groups. A moderate negative correlation was observed between centering and debris in the VDW. Rotate group (r = –0.374, p = 0.027), suggesting better centering may enhance cleaning. Conclusion: Both rotary systems demonstrated comparable shaping and cleaning abilities and can be considered clinically safe and effective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
MANSOUR et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: