Retrograde filling materials: a retrospective success-failure study of amalgam, EBA and IRM

By Dorn SO, Gartner AH

Date: 05/1991
Journal: JOE

Purpose: To compare the success rates of teeth with three different root end materials (Amalgam, SuperEBA and IRM)

N= 488 cases.

Materials and methods:

•The sample was collected from two private endodontic clinics.

•All patients that had apicectomy with a retro-grade filling in the past 10 years

•Radiographs taken at the completion of surgery and the last recall ( minimum 6 months recall )


•a) Healed lesion in which complete regeneration of PDL demonstrated radiographically

•b) Tendency to heal when the lesion decreased in size but still present •Failure: Lesions that increased in size or remained the same.

•Teeth with VRF and periodontal failures were eliminated from the study

Most highlighted results:

•The success rate for amalgam was 75%

•The success rates for SuperEBA and IRM were  95% and 91% respectively.

Clinical significance:

With the presence of SuperEBA and IRM as retrograde filling materials, amalgam should not be considered as a material of choice.