Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Feb 1;16(2):e198-e222.
doi: 10.4317/jced.61285. eCollection 2024 Feb.

CBCT vs panoramic radiography in assessment of impacted upper canine and root resorption of the adjacent teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mariela Peralta-Mamani  1 , Cássia-Maria-Fischer Rubira  1 , José López-López  2 , Heitor-Marques Honório  3 , Izabel-Regina-Fischer Rubira-Bullen  1
Affiliations
Review

CBCT vs panoramic radiography in assessment of impacted upper canine and root resorption of the adjacent teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Mariela Peralta-Mamani et al. J Clin Exp Dent. .

Abstract

Background: The IC may cause reabsorption of adjacent teeth; therefore detailed assessment of its position would enhance decision-making in the clinical workflow. The objective was to compare cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic radiography (PR) in assessing the position of the impacted upper canine (IC) and root resorption of adjacent teeth.

Material and methods: Pubmed, EMBASE, Science Direct, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases were searched for studies published before August 2023. Studies that evaluated IC by using both imaging methods were included. For statistical analysis, the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Biostat; Englewood, NJ) was used, p≤0.05.

Results: A total of 17 articles were included, with 877 patients (average age of 17.6 years) and 1,115 ICs. The most frequent mesio-distal location of the IC was in sectors 3 and 4. The meta-analysis was performed with eleven studies. CBCT was more accurate in determining the labio-palatal position compared with PR (p<0.001) (CI 95%; 60% in labial position, 0.254-0.542, OR:0.398; 56% in palatal position, 0.350-0.533, OR:0.441; 78% in mid-alveolus position, 0.188-0.234, OR:0.221). For IC angulation to the midline, CBCT showing a smaller and more accurate angle than PR (p<0.001) (CI 95%, 18.008-33.686). IC angulation to the occlusal plane and lateral incisor, there was smaller angle in PR compared to CBCT (p<0.001) (CI 95%, 51.292-65.934; CI 95%, 30.011-55.954). With PR, fewer cases of root resorption of teeth adjacent to the IC were visualized compared with CBCT (86% less) (p<0.001) (CI 95%, 0.089-0.186; OR value: 0.138; n=1049).

Conclusions: CBCT showed statistically significant differences compared to PR in the assessment of IC position and root resorption of adjacent teeth. CBCT provided clinically relevant information that may contribute to diagnosing and planning IC treatment when PR was not sufficient. Key words:Canine teeth, tooth, impacted, panoramic radiography, Cone-beam computed tomography, systematic review, meta-analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of study selection for qualitative and quantitative syntheses.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison between panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography, in the number of cases detected with resorption of the teeth adjacent to the IC.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of the labio-palatal position through panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Comparison of the IC angulation to the midline, occlusal plane, and lateral incisor through panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Al-Zoubi H, Alharbi AA, Ferguson DJ, Zafar MS. Frequency of impacted teeth and categorization of impacted canines: A retrospective radiographic study using orthopantomograms. Eur J Dent. 2017;11:117–121. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Peck S, Peck L, Kataja M. The palatally displaced canine as a dental anomaly of genetic origin. Angle Orthod. 1994;64:249–56. - PubMed
    1. Sarica I, Derindag G, Kurtuldu E, Naralan ME, Caglayan F. A retrospective study: Do all impacted teeth cause pathology? Niger J Clin Pract. 2019;22:527–533. - PubMed
    1. Bjerklin K, Ericson S. How a computerized tomography examination changed the treatment plans of 80 children with retained and ectopically positioned maxillary canines. Angle Orthod. 2006;76:43–51. - PubMed
    1. Chung DD, Weisberg M, Pagala M. Incidence and effects of genetic factors on canine impaction in an isolated Jewish population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthoped. 2011;139:e331–5. - PubMed