Two-dimensional Periapical, Panoramic Radiography Versus Three-dimensional Cone-beam Computed Tomography in the Detection of Periapical Lesion After Endodontic Treatment: A Systematic Review

Radiographic imaging is a common resource for endodontic diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Two-dimensional (2D) periapical and digital panoramic radiographs often showed image distortion; this issue was resolved with the emergence of three-dimensional (3D) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). This review examines the accuracy of various radiographic techniques in the assessment of periapical lesion after endodontic treatment. Our goal was to determine whether a 2D radiograph (periapical and panoramic) is as accurate as a 3D radiograph (i.e., CBCT) in the assessment of periapical lesion after endodontic treatment. We searched the electronic databases Medline and Cochrane and trial registries for ongoing trials. We included both retrospective and prospective studies comparing the efficacy of periapical healing with various radiographic techniques after endodontic treatment. The outcome of interest was the percentage detection of periapical lesions and periapical healing assessment after endodontic treatment. All data were collected using a specially designed extraction form. We assessed the risk of bias in the studies using the Cochrane tool for diagnostic tests (QUADAS). We judged two studies to be at low risk and two to be at moderate risk of bias. Although there was a difference in the percentage detection of periapical healing efficacy by various radiographic techniques, all studies reported that CBCT had higher accuracy in the detection of periapical lesions compared to periapical and panoramic radiography. The next best choice is periapical radiographs, followed by panoramic radiographs as they provide better visualization and accuracy.