This in vitro study aims to assess the cyclic fatigue resistance of the Protaper Ultimate (PTU) files compared to the Protaper Gold (PTG) and the M3 UDG (M3) files using various motion kinematics in simulated canals. As far as the authors are aware, no study has previously compared the three file systems before this current investigation. Therefore, closing this information gap is the goal of the current research. Methods: A total of (60 new endodontic files were randomly divided into 6 groups (10 files per group); groups 1, 3, and 5 used continuous rotation (CR), while groups 2, 4, and 6 used forward reciprocating motion (FRM). A manufactured stainless-steel artificial canal was used to perform the cyclic fatigue testing. The results were analyzed using Student’s t-test and two-way ANOVA. All pairwise comparisons revealed statistically significant differences in the time to failure (TTF) for every study group (p < 0.001), with the exception of the PTG and M3 files, which performed similarly using both CR and FRM. Conclusions: The PTU files performed better than the PTG and M3 files in terms of the TTF and number of cycles to failure (NCF) using both CR and FRM.

Root canal therapy (RCT) is usually performed in Romania by general dentists (GDPs) because they are more readily available and more reasonably priced than endodontists. Concerns have been raised about the quality of RCTs performed by GDPs, possibly due to insufficient equipment or knowledge; therefore, this study aims to investigate current endodontic practices in Romania. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted via a questionnaire distributed to 400 randomly selected Romanian dentists, with 285 fully validated completed responses (71.25% response rate). Respondents were grouped by speciality, and statistical analysis, including cross-tabulation and the χ² (chi-square) test, was used, with a significance level set at p ≤ 0.05 for all tests. Results: Significant differences were found in the use of magnification, rubber dam, sodium hypochlorite concentration, and bioceramics (p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in preferences for measuring working length (p = 0.166) or rotary instrument motion (p = 0.289). Approximately 6% of the respondents used laser technology with no significant difference across specialities (p = 0.571). Additionally, 77.9% preferred using sodium hypochlorite, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.006) regarding concentration. Conclusions: Most participants, including GDPs, use modern equipment and techniques during RCT, indicating their awareness and competence in current endodontic practices.