Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 26, 2025
Author Spotlight: Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmark Annotation Demonstration on Human Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans
Published on: September 8, 2023
Accuracy of conventional versus cone-beam CT-synthesised lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis: A
Grace Raj1, Mary Raj1, Leonardo Saigo2
1National Dental Centre Singapore, Singapore.
Objective:
To assess the accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-synthesised lateral cephalograms (CSLCs) compared with conventional lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis in human participants and skull models.
Methods:
The authors performed a search of PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar and Embase databases on 4 October 2021. Included studies met the following criteria: published in English; compared conventional lateral cephalograms and CSLCs; assessed hard- and soft-tissue landmarks; and were performed on human or skull models. Data extraction from eligible studies was performed by two independent reviewers. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist tool - diagnostic accuracy studies.
Results:
A total of 20 eligible articles were included in this systematic review. Of these 20 studies, 17 presented with a low risk of bias, while three were found to have a moderate risk of bias. Hard- and soft-tissue analyses were evaluated for each imaging modality. The findings reveal that CSLCs are accurate and comparable to conventional lateral cephalograms for cephalometric analysis and demonstrate good inter-observer reliability. Four studies reported a higher accuracy with CSLCs.
Conclusion:
Overall, the diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of CSLCs were comparable to conventional lateral cephalograms in cephalometric analysis. It is justified that patients who have an existing CBCT scan do not need an additional lateral cephalogram, minimising unnecessary radiation exposure, expenses and time for the patient. Larger voxel sizes and low-dose CBCT protocols can be considered to minimise radiation exposure.
Registration:
This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021282019).
