Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the root canal transportation of the crown-down technique performed with the Ni-Ti rotary ProFile system (Dentsply/Maillefer), with the step-back technique using stainless steel K-Flexofiles (Dentsply/Maillefer). Method and Materials: Thirty simulated root canals in resin blocks were equally divided into 2 groups. The first group was instrumented with the ProFile system in a crown-down technique and the second group with hand K-Flexofiles in a step-back technique. After instrumentation, resin blocks of both groups were scanned by a transparency scanner, and the derived images were superimposed with the scanned image of an uninstrumented block. Transportation was digitally calculated by a computer software, and results were statistically evaluated by Student t test. Results: Statistically significant differences (P < .05) were found among the 2 groups at 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 mm from the apical foramen. No statistically significant difference was detected at 3 mm from the apical foramen. Conclusion: ProFile caused less transportation at 1 and 2 mm from the apex, whereas at 3 mm, both instrumentation techniques caused the same transportation. Standard deviation was less in the ProFile group than in the hand file group, indicating a more standardized preparation. (Quintessence Int 2006; 37:369–374)

Key words: crown-down technique, rotary files, shaping ability, simulated root canal, step-back technique, transportation