Keles A.Ahmetoglu F.Ocak M.S.Dayi B.Bozkurt A.Orucoglu H.2020-03-262020-03-2620141305-7456https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.126237https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/31385Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sealing abilities of three different gutta-percha techniques in experimentally defective roots (EDR) and non-defective roots (NR). Materials and Methods: Sixty canine teeth were divided into six groups of ten; Group 1, NR + cold lateral condensation (CLC); Group 2, EDR + LC; Group 3, NR + BeeFill; Group 4, EDR + BeeFill; Group 5, NR + Thermafil; and Group 6, EDR + Thermafil. Apical leakage was measured using a computerized fluid filtration meter with a laser system. Results: Statistical analysis revealed that the CLC demonstrated more microleakage in the EDR than in the NR (P < 0.01). Thermafil demonstrated more microleakage in the NR than in the EDR (P < 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found between the BeeFill groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that internal resorptive cavities can affect the apical sealing properties of different root canal filling techniques, with Thermafil ensuring the lowest apical microleakage. © 2014 Dental Investigations Society.en10.4103/1305-7456.126237info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessInternal ResorptionMicroleakageRoot Canal Filling TechniquesArticle813237Q1