Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A phantom head model was modified to simulate as closely as possible the limited access encountered during periapical surgery on maxillary anterior teeth. Extracted human maxillary anterior and mandibular canine teeth were placed in this model in a standardized position for root resection, retrograde cavity preparation and filling with amalgam. Three different designs of retrograde cavities were evaluated: the conventional class 1 cavity, the slot cavity and a previously unreported approach, the funnel cavity. Upon completion of the retrograde filling, the teeth were removed from the model and subjected to microleakage tests by placing radiolabelled lipopolysaccharide in a reservoir created coronal to the retrograde fillings. Leakage was quantified by measurement of radioactivity in scintillation counter. It was found that the retrograde fillings in the funnel cavity leaked significantly less than those in the other two cavity designs. There was no statistically significant difference in leakage between the conventional class 1 and the slot cavities up to the thirtieth day 30.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gulabivala et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: