Aim: The need for our study was to compare and analyze canal shaping ability of Wave One files with that of Pro-Taper system files. Methodology: Forty sample teeth were used inserted in a plaster of paris rectangular block. In all specimens, the glide path was achieved with PathFile 1, 2, and 3 at the working length (WL). Specimens were then assigned to 1 of 2 groups for shaping: specimens in group 1 were shaped with ProTaper S1-S2 at the WL and specimens in group 2 were shaped with WaveOne Primary reciprocating files at the WL. Analysis of the curvature-radius ratio (CRr) and the relative axis error (rAe), representing canal curvature modification were done. Data were analyzed with one-way balanced analyses of variance at 2 levels (P < .05). Results: The instrument factor was extremely significant for both the CRr parameter (F1 = 9.59, P = .004) and the rAe parameter (F1 = 13.55, P = .001). Conclusion: Canal modifications are reduced when the new WaveOne NiTi single-file system is used.
Keywords: Canal centering, Canal shaping, Wave- One, Pro-Taper.