Aim: This retrospective standardized study aimed to compare the efficacy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic radiography (PR) in assessing endodontic complications and the anatomical features of endodontic tissues. The hypothesis of the study is that CBCT will provide higher diagnostic accuracy than PR in detecting endodontic complications and anatomical variations. Materials and methods: In this study, the retrospective analysis was conducted on CBCT and PR pictures of 88 patients. The images were assessed according to endodontic complications (apical lesion, bone loss, fracture, cracked root, external resorption, internal resorption, perforation, inadequate root canal filling, and excessive root canal filling), anatomical features (accessory canal, pulp stone, canal calcification, and dens invaginatus). Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 20.0. McNemar test was used to compare CBCT and PR methods, and kappa statistics were used to assess agreement. Differences between methods were analyzed using Chi-square and Fisher's Exact Tests. Significance was accepted as p < 0.05. Results: Statistically significant differences were observed between CBCT and PR techniques in detecting endodontic complications (p < 0.001). Notable correlations were identified between tooth type and the occurrence of certain issues; external resorption was more frequently observed in anterior teeth using CBCT (anterior teeth 46.8%, premolars 10.6%, molars 42.6%, p = 0.021), whilst insufficient filling was more prevalent in molars assessed with PR (molars % 78.5, p = 0.018). Conclusion: According to the findings of this retrospective cross-sectional study, CBCT demonstrated higher diagnostic performance than PR in evaluating endodontic complications and anatomical features. However, the choice of imaging method should be individualized for each case and guided by a careful risk-benefit assessment.
GÖK et al. (2026) studied this question.