The aim of this study was to compare the quality of the coronal seal, using an in vitro bacterial invasion test, of three different root canal filling systems. Twenty-seven freshly extracted mandibular premolars were selected and divided into three experimental groups (G1, G2 and G3 n=7) and two control groups (Ct+ and Ct- n=3). All teeth in the experimental groups were prepared using NiTi Mtwo rotating instruments and then the endodontic treatments were completed using the three-tested warm guttapercha root filling techniques: Microseal (G1), Thermafil (G2) and System B (G3). All root filling techniques were performed using the same endodontic sealer (Pulp Canal Sealer). Three teeth were instrumented and not filled, serving as positive controls (Ct+) and the last three teeth, with intact crowns and no endodontic treatment, served as negative controls (Ct-). All samples were mounted in a two-chamber apparatus and exposed to Enterococcus faecalis performing a bacterial infiltration test. All samples were observed for a maximum period of 60 days checking for turbidity of the BHI broth on a daily basis recording when contamination occurred. A quantitative evaluation of the bacterial CFU/ml was performed using the URO-QUICK™ system. On day 32 an overall value was recorded of contamination of 42.85% for group G1, 71.42% for G2 and 42.85% for G3; after 60 days, the final contamination result was 85.71% for group G1, and 100% for both G2 and G3 groups. Considering the number of contaminated samples at the end of the observation period, the three techniques showed no statistically significant differences. The study highlighted the bacterial permeability of gutta-percha/seal barrier, underlining the importance of an effective coronal restoration to ensure a durable seal after root canal treatment.