Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has transformed diagnostic and therapeutic approaches within endodontics by providing practitioner-accessible three-dimensional visualization of dentoalveolar anatomy with high spatial resolution and comparatively low radiation dose. Conventional two-dimensional radiography, while essential and routinely used, suffers from inherently limited perspectives caused by projection, geometric distortion, and anatomical superimposition; these limitations can obscure complex root canal systems, periapical pathology and subtle fractures. CBCT fills these diagnostic gaps by producing isotropic voxel datasets that permit multiplanar reconstructions, accurate measurement, and volumetric assessment of osseous and dental structures. The present review traces the historical development of dental radiology leading to dental CBCT, summarizes fundamental technical considerations including voxel size, field of view and reconstruction algorithms, and discusses the principal advantages and limitations of CBCT relative to conventional imaging. Emphasis is placed on endodontic indications: The pre-operative evaluation of canal morphology and anomalous anatomy, the detection of vertical and horizontal root fractures, assessment of internal and external resorption, intra-operative localization of separated instruments and perforations, and objective postoperative outcome appraisal. Practical considerations, such as radiation dose, artifact generation and interpretation challenges are discussed, and suggested practice guidelines for appropriate use are provided. The intent is to present an integrated, evidence-informed perspective that assists clinicians in selecting and applying CBCT appropriately to enhance diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes in endodontic care.
cone-beam computed tomographyendodonticsimagingroot morphologyperiapical lesionsFunding: No funding was received.1. Introduction
Radiographic imaging has been integral to dental diagnosis and treatment planning since the dawn of dental radiology. Conventional periapical and panoramic images have long supported clinical decision-making through straightforward depiction of dental and osseous structures in the mesiodistal plane (1). However, these two-dimensional projections compress three-dimensional anatomy into a flat image, limiting detection and characterization of buccolingual features, canal complexity, and subtle periapical changes (2). The introduction of volumetric imaging modalities, culminating in compact cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) systems suitable for dental clinics, has enabled clinicians to visualize and quantify anatomy in three orthogonal planes, enhancing diagnostic confidence and enabling more precise treatment planning (3) (Fig. 1). CBCT has the ability to produce multiplanar images enabling more precise assessment of anatomical structures and pathology. CBCT is increasingly becoming an invaluable tool in endodontics, significantly improving patient care and treatment decisions (4).
2. History of dental radiology and CBCT development
The discovery of X-rays by Wilhelm Röntgen in 1895 initiated a rapid succession of innovations that placed radiography at the heart of medical and dental diagnostics (5). Early dental exposures were technically demanding and prolonged, but progressive improvements in film technology, tube design and processing rapidly reduced exposure time and improved image quality (6). With the conceptual foundation for tomographic reconstruction articulated by Johann Radon and the practical realization of clinical computed tomography by Hounsfield and Cormack, three-dimensional reconstruction became possible (3). However, early medical CT systems remained prohibitive in cost, size and dose for routine dental use. The emergence of true dental CBCT systems in the late 1990s and early 2000s, pioneered by commercial units, such as the NewTom series and later by i-CAT, Accuitomo and others, made volumetric imaging accessible to dental practitioners by combining cone-beam geometry, dedicated detectors and more efficient reconstruction algorithms (7,8). The iterative improvement in detector technology, software and choice of field of view (FOV) has driven the wider adoption of CBCT across endodontics, implantology and orthodontics (1).
3. Limitations of conventional radiographic imaging
Despite their ubiquity, intraoral and panoramic radiographs are constrained by a number of limitations. Projected compression conceals information in the buccolingual dimension, geometric distortion and unavoidable magnification introduce measurement errors, and anatomic noise arising from superimposed structures compromises lesion detection and morphological assessment (5). Serial radiographs require strict standardization to be comparable, and small pathoses may remain radiographically occult until progression reaches cortical bone (9). These limitations particularly affect endodontic tasks, such as the identification of accessory canals, locating missed anatomy, and distinguishing between odontogenic and non-odontogenic radiolucencies.
4. CBCT: Technical considerationsVoxel size
In CBCT imaging, the voxel represents the smallest volumetric element and determines the achievable spatial resolution. CBCT provides voxel resolution which is isotropic, i.e., equal in three orthogonal dimensions. Commercial units provide voxel sizes that range from ~0.076 mm for high-resolution small-FOV scans to 0.2-0.4 mm for larger FOVs. The selection of voxel size represents a practical trade-off between image resolution, image noise and radiation dose (10). For endodontic applications where fine canal anatomy or fracture lines need to be resolved, smaller voxel sizes are preferred, albeit at the cost of higher radiation exposure and increased reconstruction time. Positioning the tooth in the center or closer to the anterior periphery of the FOV and selecting small FOV sizes improves the detection of root fracture and decreases artefact interference.
FOV
FOV selection is central to optimizing diagnostic yield, while limiting radiation exposure. Modern CBCT devices offer selectable FOVs, from localized segments that cover a few centimeters to craniofacial volumes encompassing the entire maxillofacial skeleton (11) (Fig. 2). Clinicians should tailor the FOV to the diagnostic question: Localized endodontic concerns demand small FOVs (tooth or single-arch coverage), whereas complex trauma or multi-tooth pathoses may justify larger volumes. Proper collimation and FOV selection reduce effective dose and limit unnecessary anatomical imaging.
Image reconstruction and algorithms
CBCT reconstruction has historically relied on filtered back projection algorithms adapted for cone-beam geometry, such as the Feldkamp-Davis-Kress (FDK) method. While computationally efficient, FDK can produce cone-beam artifacts and limitations for objects located away from the central source plane (12). Iterative reconstruction techniques, increasingly available with modern systems, allow for analysis of the physics of photon interactions and detector response more accurately, allowing improvements in noise suppression and artifact reduction at an equivalent or reduced dose. Clinicians should be aware that different post-processing approaches and reconstruction kernels of manufacturers influence image appearance and diagnostic performance (13).
Patient positioning and scan volume
Patient orientation, i.e., in a sitting, standing or supine position, affects comfort and motion artifact susceptibility. Effective head stabilization and short scan times minimize motion-induced degradation. The shape of the captured volume (cylindrical vs. spherical) and detector size determine the maximum scan height; certain units use offset detectors or multiple rotations to extend the FOV (14). Operators need to ensure that the region of interest is centrally located within the volume to minimize truncation artifacts and to maximize the image (12).
CBCT vs. conventional radiographs
Intraoral radiographs of D-speed yield greater radiation dose of 170.7 µSv than the E/Fspeed and digital films which is 34.9 µSv (15). In extraoral radiographs, according to ICRP 2005/2007 (https://www.icrp.org/publication.asp?id=ICRP%20Publication%20103), the doses are between 2.7 and 24.3 µSv for the panoramic and 5.6 µSv for the lateral cephalometric. For full mouth series of intraoral radiographs, panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs, the total dose varies between 43.2 and 200.6 µSv, whereas the large FOV CBCT requires 30 to 68 µSv for the NewTom 3G, 74 µSv for the Next Generation i-CAT, 82 to 182.1 µSv for the Classic i-CAT, 87 µSv for the SkyView, 93 to 260 µSv for the Kodak 9500, and 98 to 498 µSv for the Iluma (16).
Comparison between different CBCT devices
Endodontic treatment usually uses smaller FOVs. Radiation doses for small FOV CBCT from different devices are illustrated in Fig. 3 (17-19).
In their study, Kim et al (20) compared I-CAT Gendex CB-500 and Orthopantograph OP300 in the detection of mechanically simulated peri-implant buccal bone defects in dry human mandibles. The result of their study suggested that the selection of CBCT systems with their respective commonly used acquisition protocols does not significantly affect diagnostic performance (20). However, the study by Rathee et al (21) compared the VelocityAI™, SmartAdapt® and PerFraction™ methods based on dosimetric analysis and demonstrated that the the VelocityAI™-based method using fraction N CBCT was most similar to the reference plan, whereas the other two methods had significant differences.
Clinical efficiency
Tsai et al (22), in an in situ study, demonstrated higher accuracy in CBCT than intraoral radiography. This was supported by the meta-analysis by Leonardi Dutra et al (23) which stated that digital and periapical radiographs were effective diagnostic tools for the detection of apical periodontitis; however, CBCT imaging had an excellent accuracy value.
5. Advantages of CBCT in dentistry and endodontics
CBCT confers multiple advantages: A lower radiation dose relative to medical CT, higher spatial resolution than panoramic imaging for bone and dental structures, and interactive multiplanar visualization that facilitates accurate measurement and surgical planning. Rapid single-rotation acquisition reduces motion artifacts compared with multi-pass fan-beam techniques, and the relatively compact footprint and lower cost have made CBCT widely deployable in dental offices (24). Further clinical benefits include the precise assessment of periapical lesions, improved detection of root fractures and the ability to localize anatomical landmarks critical to surgical planning. The isotropic nature of CBCT voxels enables distortion-free measurement across planes, a feature that is particularly useful for implant planning and endodontic assessment (Fig. 4).
6. Pre-operative assessment using CBCT
Root canal morphology and anatomical variants A primary use of CBCT in endodontics is the detailed pre-operative assessment of complex canal anatomy. Variants such as C-shaped canals, dens invaginatus, taurodontism and additional roots or canals can be accurately characterized in three dimensions, assisting the clinician in access design, negotiation strategy and selection of instruments. The precise knowledge of canal curvature and cross-sectional shape reduces the risk of instrument separation and canal transportation (25). Case-based studies and population surveys using CBCT have documented a higher detection rate of accessory canals and unusual root configurations compared with conventional radiography are discussed below.
Detection of accessory canals and additional roots
High-resolution CBCT imaging improves the sensitivity for identifying accessory canals, second mesiobuccal canals (MB2) in maxillary molars and additional distolingual roots in mandibular molars. These anatomical discoveries directly affect treatment strategy: Locating and treating missed canals often changes prognosis (26). The study by Sukovic (24) stated that employing CBCT have revealed clinically significant canal systems that are not evident on two-dimensional radiographs, underscoring the value of the modality in complex endodontic cases. In their study, Aung and Myint (27) stated a sensitivity and specificity of 94 and 93.1%, respectively for the detection of second canal in permanent teeth. A sensitivity of 96.6% for MB2 was followed by a sensitivity of 88.8% for maxillary and mandibular premolars and 81% for mandibular molars. The specificity of 97.6% for premolars was trialed by a specificity of 85% for mandibular molars and MB2. For permanent mandibular canines, a sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 100% were estimated. CBCT exhibited greater agreement in detecting the second canal with micro-CT, with an estimated sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 95.6%. The highest prevalence of the second canal comprised the highest sensitivity of 99.1% and the lowest specificity of 77.5%. Following the exclusion of case-control studies, a 3% drop of sensitivity from the summary estimate was observed. Multiple spectrum of the second canal had a higher sensitivity of 8.6% and a lower specificity of 4.4% than a single spectrum (27).
Differential diagnosis and lesion localization
CBCT aids the differentiation of odontogenic from non-odontogenic radiolucencies, determines communications between lesions and the maxillary sinus, and clarifies the association between pathology and adjacent anatomical structures (25). For ambiguous cases with non-specific symptoms or inconclusive periapical radiographs, CBCT provides additional diagnostic confidence and helps avoid unnecessary or inappropriate endodontic interventions (6).
7. Intra-operative and post-operative assessmentLocalization of perforations and separated instruments
Endodontic mishaps, such as root perforations and separated instruments are challenging to locate precisely using two-dimensional imaging. CBCT provides volumetric localization, assisting in decision-making regarding conservative repair, surgical intervention, or tooth extraction (7). Pre-operative CBCT can also assist in planning retrieval strategies for fractured instruments and in determining the proximity of procedural errors to vital structures (9).
Diagnosis of root fractures
Vertical root fractures (VRFs) and horizontal root fractures are often radiographically occult on conventional films unless the X-ray beam aligns closely with the fracture plane (6). CBCT improves the diagnostic accuracy for VRF by revealing fracture lines, associated radiolucent halos and adjacent bone changes in three dimensions (13). In the study by Hassan et al (28), the sensitivity and specificity of CBCT and periapical radiograph was compared for detecting vertical root fracture. The sensitivity and specificity were 79.4 and 92.5%, respectively for CBCT and 37.1 and 95%, respectively for periapical radiographs (28). However, the presence of root fillings or metallic posts can create beam-hardening artifacts that reduce sensitivity; thus, clinicians need to interpret suspicious findings within the clinical context and consider supplemental evidence (25).
Evaluation of resorption and healing
CBCT enhances the detection and characterization of internal and external resorptive defects, including the extent, perforation status and communication with the periodontal ligament or oral cavity (26). In post-operative follow-up, volumetric assessment permits the more objective measurement of lesion volume and bone fill compared with planar radiography, enabling a more accurate appraisal of healing progression. Nevertheless, the higher sensitivity of CBCT may reveal radiolucencies that represent cicatricial changes rather than active pathology, and the clinician should integrate clinical findings when making decisions (2).
Surgical planning and follow-up
For periapical surgery and other endodontic surgical procedures, CBCT is invaluable in delineating the association between apical pathology and adjacent structures, such as the maxillary sinus, nasal floor and mandibular canal (29). The accurate assessment of bone thickness, lesion extent and root apex orientation supports surgical access planning, resection angulation, and the selection of appropriate retrograde filling materials. Additionally, CBCT is useful in post-operative surveillance to evaluate bone regeneration and detect persistent pathologies (29).
8. CBCT in pediatric endodontics
Given the potential risks associated with radiation exposure in children, it is imperative for clinicians to have a robust understanding of the applications of CBCT in pediatric patients. The most common indications for CBCT referrals in the pediatric population are impacted or unerupted permanent teeth, endodontic treatment and orthodontic assessments. Endodontic treatment uses smaller FOVs, such as 8x8 and 5x5, which are primarily of first permanent molars and traumatized upper central incisors (30).
CBCT provides associate increased read in locating incomprehensible canals, calcified canals, and curvature of roots in pediatric patients (31). CBCT is capable of providing submillimeter resolution in images of high diagnostic quality, with short scanning times (10-70 sec) and radiation dosages reportedly up to 25-30-fold lower than those of conventional CT scans (head) (32). The radio density and thickness of the tissue formed after pulp capping can also be studied using CBCT (33). The positioning of FOV in the vertical plane with the lead protection of thyroid and eye lens has the largest impact on local dose reduction in pediatric patients (34).
9. Limitations, artifacts and radiation considerations
While CBCT provides numerous diagnostic advantages, clinicians need to be mindful of its limitations. Metal artifacts from posts and restorations can obscure anatomy and generate false-positive or false-negative appearances (26). Image noise, motion artifacts and truncation artifacts arising from incomplete coverage reduce interpretability (35). A CBCT protocol with a higher kVp with metal artefact reduction can improve the image quality in CBCT scans when subjectively analyzed. However, these factors did not improve the diagnosis of VRF (36).
The study by Torabinejad et al (37) demonstrated that 1 out of 5 patients successfully treated with root canal based on periapical X-ray and no clinical symptoms, will have 1 mm CBCT radiolucency. There is no information to determine whether these radiolucencies are complete healing, persistent disease, or fibrous scar tissue; thus, the dentist should be cautioned in retreatments to avoid overtreatment (37).
The radiation dose, although generally lower than medical CT, is higher than standard intraoral radiography; therefore, justification and optimization principles need to be followed (35). FOV selection, shielding and ALARA principles (https://www.cdc.gov/radiation-health/safety/alara.html) guide the responsible application of CBCT imaging. Comparative dosimetry exhibits a large range in effective doses across devices and protocols; therefore, practitioners should be familiar with the radiation characteristics of their unit and adhere to national and local regulations (38).
Radiation safety
According to the study by Pauwels et al (39), by decreasing mA values, one can proportionally decrease radiation dose with a fixed tube voltage (kV); however, CBCT scans acquired with low mA and kV may present higher artefact intensity. A smaller FOV size presents the highest sensitivity, specificity and accuracy for the detection of root fracture and the lowest artefact intensity; therefore, one could assume that larger FOVs may impair that diagnostic task (40). Although small voxel sizes are indicated for root fracture assessment, some other diagnostic tasks in endodontics may not be jeopardized by scans acquired with larger voxel size, with the benefit of dose reduction (41).
ALARA has been revised throughout time to the ‘as low as diagnostically acceptable’ (ALADA) approach, which aids medical practitioners in selecting the optimal FOV based on the region of interest (42). In panoramic charge-coupled devices, the effective dose observed was 16.1 µSv, 5.6 µSv in postero-anterior cephalometric photo-stimulable phosphor (PSP), 5.1 µSv in lateral cephalometric PSP, 68 µSv in New Tom 3G-Large FOV, and 569 µSv in CB Mercuray-‘Facial’ FOV (43).
In the study by Qu et al (44) on the New/Tom 9000 CBCT scanner, the effective organ doses to the thyroid and esophagus were 31.0 and 2.4 µSv, respectively, with a collarless CBCT scan. The effective organ dosage for the thyroid gland and esophagus were decreased to 15.9 Sv (48.7 % reduction) and 1.4 Sv (41.7% reduction), respectively, when a single thyroid collar was worn snugly in front of the neck, and 46.5 and 41.7% reduction when two collars were used (front and rear of the neck) (44).
10. Practical recommendations and appropriate use criteria
Practical guidance for CBCT in endodontics emphasizes targeted, case-specific use. Indications where CBCT is likely to change management include: teeth with unresolved symptoms despite negative or ambiguous radiographs; suspected complex morphology or additional canals not visualized on 2D images; suspected root fractures that cannot be confirmed by periapical radiographs; pre-surgical planning for apicoectomy; assessment of persistent or recurrent periapical pathology; and evaluation of resorption. Conversely, routine screening CBCT for all endodontic cases is not justified due to cost and radiation considerations (45). A decision-making flowchart for the use of CBCT in endodontic practice is presented in Fig. 5. Clinicians should document the diagnostic rationale and obtain informed consent mentioning radiation risks and benefits. The AAE and AAOMR guideline (https://aaomr.org/common/Uploaded%20files/Position%20Papers/aaomr-aae_position_paper_cb.pdf) states that CBCT in endodontics should be limited in endodontics to assess and treat complex endodontic-related issues, such as the identification of accessory canal, root curvature, periapical pathoses, intra and the post-treatment assessment of complicated endodontics (46).
11. Conclusion
CBCT represents a significant advancement in endodontic imaging, providing three-dimensional visualization that improves the detection of complex root anatomy, periapical pathology, fractures and resorptive defects. When used judiciously with appropriate FOV selection and dose optimization, CBCT provides diagnostic insight that can materially alter treatment planning and improve outcomes. Clinicians need to balance diagnostic benefits against artifact risk and radiation exposure, integrating CBCT findings with clinical examination and other diagnostic tests. Continued improvements in detector technology and reconstruction algorithms promise to enhance image quality while reducing dose, further strengthening the role of CBCT in endodontic practice.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank A.B Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences and Manipal College of Dental Sciences for their institutional support for resource collection for the purposes of the review. The authors also acknowledge the contribution of the dental radiology staff who provided valuable insights during manuscript preparation.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Authors' contributions
AS was involved in the conceptualization of the study and in the drafting of the manuscript. SR was involved in the literature synthesis, figure planning, critical revisions, technical editing, formatting and references. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. Data authentication is not applicable.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Patient consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
ReferencesBenderIBSeltzerSRoentgenographic and direct observation of experimental lesions in bone: IJ Am Dent Assoc6215216019611465127410.1097/00004770-200311000-00005BenderIBSeltzerSRoentgenographic and direct observation of experimental lesions in bone: IIJ Am Dent Assoc6270871619611465127510.1097/00004770-200311000-00006van der SteltPFExperimentally produced bone lesionsOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol593063121985385682510.1016/0030-4220(85)90172-0WongJZhangCLeeAHCClinical benefits and limitations of cone-beam computed tomography in endodontic practice: A contemporary evidence-based reviewDiagnostics (Basel)15311720254146411710.3390/diagnostics15243117WhiteSCAtchisonKAHewlettERFlackVFEfficacy of FDA guidelines for prescribing radiographs to detect dental and intraosseous conditionsOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod801081141995755284910.1016/s1079-2104(95)80026-3SuomalainenAKSaloARobinsonSPeltolaJSThe 3DX multi-image micro-CT device in clinical dental practiceDentomaxillofac Radiol36808520071740388410.1259/dmfr/30358216EstrelaCBuenoMRLelesCRAzevedoBCAzevedoJRAccuracy of cone beam computed tomography and panoramic and periapical radiography for detection of apical periodontitisJ Endod3427327920081829127410.1016/j.joen.2007.11.023JacobsRSalmonBCodariMHassanBBornsteinMMCone beam computed tomography in implant dentistry: Recommendations for clinical useBMC Oral Health188820182976445810.1186/s12903-018-0523-5ArnheiterCScarfeWCFarmanAGTrends in maxillofacial cone-beam computed tomography usageOral Radiol2280852006GelbierS125 Years of developments in dentistry, 1880-2005. Part 3: Dental equipment and materialsBr Dent J19953653920051624463910.1038/sj.bdj.4812913TruongTTNguyenMKZaidiHThe mathematical foundations of 3D Compton scatter emission imagingInt J Biomed Imaging20079278020071838260810.1155/2007/92780CormackAMEarly two-dimensional reconstruction (CT scanning) and recent topics stemming from it. Nobel lecture, December 8, 1979J Comput Assist Tomogr46586641980625111910.1097/00004728-198010000-00016HounsfieldGNComputed medical imaging. Nobel lecture, Decemberr 8, 1979J Comput Assist Tomogr46656741980699734110.1097/00004728-198010000-00017PatelSDawoodAFordTPWhaitesEThe potential applications of cone beam computed tomography in the management of endodontic problemsInt Endod J4081883020071769710810.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01299.xLudlowJBDavies-LudlowLEWhiteSCPatient risk related to common dental radiographic examinations: The impact of 2007 international commission on radiological protection recommendations regarding dose calculationJ Am Dent Assoc1391237124320081876263410.14219/jada.archive.2008.0339LorenzoniDCBologneseAMGaribDGGuedesFRSant'annaEFCone-beam computed tomography and radiographs in dentistry: Aspects related to radiation doseInt J Dent201281376820122254806410.1155/2012/813768RobertsJADrageNADaviesJThomasDWEffective dose from cone beam CT examinations in dentistryBr J Radiol82354020091885221210.1259/bjr/31419627LudlowJBIvanovicMComparative dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiologyOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod10610611420081850415210.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.018QuXMLiGLudlowJBZhangZYMaXCEffective radiation dose of ProMax 3D cone-beam computerized tomography scanner with different dental protocolsOral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod11077077620102095222010.1016/j.tripleo.2010.06.013KimJHAbdala-JúniorRMunhozLCortesARGWatanabePCACostaCAritaESComparison between different cone-beam computed tomography devices in the detection of mechanically simulated peri-implant bone defectsImaging Sci Dent5013313920203260158810.5624/isd.2020.50.2.133RatheeSBurkeBHeikalAComparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight lossJ Med Phys4734435120223690850010.4103/jmp.jmp_7_22TsaiPTorabinejadMRiceDAzevedoBAccuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and periapical radiography in detecting small periapical lesionsJ Endod3896597020122270366210.1016/j.joen.2012.03.001Leonardi DutraKHaasLPorporattiALFlores-MirCNascimento SantosJMezzomoLACorrêaMDe Luca CantoGDiagnostic accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography and conventional radiography on apical periodontitis: A systematic review and meta-analysisJ Endod4235636420162690291410.1016/j.joen.2015.12.015SukovicPCone-beam computed tomography in maxillofacial imagingOrthod Craniofac Res6 (Suppl 1)S31S3620031460653210.1034/j.1600-0544.2003.259.xRobbRADynamic spatial reconstruction: an X-ray video-fluoroscopic CT scanner for dynamic volume imaging of moving organsIEEE Trans Med Imaging1223319821823825510.1109/TMI.1982.4307545Saint-FélixDTroussetYPicardCPonchutCRoméasRRougéeAIn vivo evaluation of a new system for 3D computerized angiographyPhys Med Biol3958359519941555160010.1088/0031-9155/39/3/020AungNMMyintKKDiagnostic accuracy of CBCT for detection of second canal of permanent teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysisInt J Dent2021110747120213433576710.1155/2021/1107471HassanBMetskaMEOzokARvan der SteltPWesselinkPRDetection of vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth by a cone beam computed tomography scanJ Endod3571972220091941009110.1016/j.joen.2009.01.022RougéeAPicardCSaint-FélixDTroussetYMollTAmielMThree-dimensional coronary arteriographyInt J Card Imaging1067701994802153310.1007/BF01151583BarakaMGhorabHMAnterEElKershNMIndications and technical parameters of cone beam computed tomography in paediatric dentistry at Alexandria and Cairo universities: A retrospective studyEur Arch Paediatr Dent261017102520254048489110.1007/s40368-025-01062-1PaulSChawlaMSarafBGSheoranNCone-beam computed tomography in pediatric dentistry: Case series and reviewJ Oral Health Comm Dent1462692020ScarfeWCFarmanAGSukovicPClinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practiceJ Can Dent Assoc727580200616480609MathurVPDhillonJKLoganiAKalraGEvaluation of indirect pulp capping using three different materials: A randomized control trial using cone-beam computed tomographyIndian J Dent Res2762362920162816926010.4103/0970-9290.199588VogiatziTMenzRVernaCBornsteinMMDagassan-BerndtDEffect of field of view (FOV) positioning and shielding on radiation dose in paediatric CBCTDentomaxillofac Radiol512021031620223576234610.1259/dmfr.20210316FahrigRFoxAJLownieSHoldsworthDWUse of a C-arm system to generate true three-dimensional computed rotational angiograms: Preliminary in vitro and in vivo resultsAJNR Am J Neuroradiol181507151419979296192Lagos de MeloLPQueirozPMMoreira-SouzaLNadaesMRSantaellaGMOliveiraMLFreitasDQInfluence of CBCT parameters on image quality and the diagnosis of vertical root fractures in teeth with metallic posts: An ex vivo studyRestor Dent Endod48e1620233728434510.5395/rde.2023.48.e16TorabinejadMRiceDDMaktabiOOyoyoUAbramovitchKPrevalence and size of periapical radiolucencies using cone-beam computed tomography in teeth without apparent intraoral radiographic lesions: A new periapical index with a clinical recommendationJ Endod4438939420182939511510.1016/j.joen.2017.11.015SchuelerBASenAHsiungHHLatchawREHuXThree-dimensional vascular reconstruction with a clinical X-ray angiography systemAcad Radiol46936991997934429210.1016/s1076-6332(97)80141-9PauwelsRArakiKSiewerdsenJHThongvigitmaneeSSTechnical aspects of dental CBCT: State of the artDentomaxillofac Radiol442014022420152526364310.1259/dmfr.20140224de Oliveira PintoMGMeloSLSSuassunaFCMMarinhoLELeiteJBDSBatistaAUDBentoPMMeloDPInfluence of size of field of view (FOV), position within the FOV, and scanning mode on the detection of root fracture and observer's perception of artifacts in CBCT imagesDentomaxillofac Radiol502020056320213356588410.1259/dmfr.20200563YeungAWKJacobsRBornsteinMMNovel low-dose protocols using cone beam computed tomography in dental medicine: A review focusing on indications, limitations, and future possibilitiesClin Oral Investig232573238120193102519210.1007/s00784-019-02907-yChoiEFordNLMeasuring absorbed dose for i-CAT CBCT examinations in child, adolescent and adult phantomsDentomaxillofac Radiol442015001820152578582210.1259/dmfr.20150018LudlowJBDose and risk in dental diagnostic imaging: With emphasis on dosimetry of CBCTKorean J Oral Maxillofac Radiol391751842009QuXMLiGSanderinkGCHZhangZYMaXCDose reduction of cone beam CT scanning for the entire oral and maxillofacial regions with thyroid collarsDentomaxillofac Radiol4137337820122270733010.1259/dmfr/30200901KawataYNikiNKumazakiTMeasurement of blood vessel characteristics for disease detection based on cone-beam CT imagesIEEE Trans Nucl Sci43334833541996FayadMILevinMDRubinsteinRAHirschbergCSNairMBenavidesEBarghanSRuprechtAUse of cone beam computed tomography in endodontics 2015 updateJ Endod41139313962015
Three orthogonal planes in cone-beam computed tomography.
Different FOVs for cone-beam computed tomography. FOV, field of view.
Radiation doses for small FOVs in different CBCT devices. FOV, field of view; CBCT, cone-beam computed tomography.
Indications for CBCT in endodontics. CBCT, cone-beam computed tomography.