Exploring Diagnostic Reliability of CBCT for Vertical Root Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analytical Approach
Luiz Carlos de Lima Dias-Junior, Diego Leonardo de Souza, Adriana Pinto Bezerra, Marcio Correa, Cleonice da Silveira Teixeira, Eduardo Antunes Bortoluzzi, Lucas da Fonseca Roberti Garcia

TL;DR
This study reviews how reliable CBCT scans are for detecting vertical root fractures in lab settings, finding that factors like fracture type and metal posts affect accuracy.
Contribution
The study provides a systematic review and meta-analysis on CBCT diagnostic accuracy for vertical root fractures, identifying key influencing factors.
Findings
CBCT scans show higher sensitivity for complete vertical root fractures compared to incomplete ones.
The presence of metal posts reduces both sensitivity and specificity of CBCT for detecting fractures.
Smaller voxel sizes improve detection accuracy in teeth with metal posts.
Abstract
This systematic review investigated the different factors associated with the diagnostic accuracy of vertical root fractures (VRFs) with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans, assessed by in vitro studies. Studies were screened from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Lilacs, up to May 2025. The included studies assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CBCT scans for laboratory-induced VRFs. The quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Meta-analyses were performed using the bivariate model with random effects to produce summary sensitivity (SSe) and specificity (SSp) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The influence of confounding factors on the accuracy of CBCT images was investigated by meta-regression models. Covariates were added to the bivariate model to assess the impact on sensitivity, specificity, or both. The quality of evidence…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsDental Radiography and Imaging · Radiology practices and education · Radiation Dose and Imaging
