Objectives: Evaluate the diagnostic validity of CBCT in measuring periodontal bone defects when compared with the reference standard (in situ measurement).
Methods: Studies in which the main objective was to evaluate the diagnostic validity of CBCT in measuring periodontal bone defects when compared with the reference standard were selected. Four databases were searched. The studies were selected by two independent reviewers. The methodology of selected studies was assessed using the 14-item Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendation was assessed by The Grading of Recommendations Assessment Tool, Development and Evaluation.
Results: Using a selection process in two phases, 16 studies were identified and, in seven articles meta-analysis was performed. The results from these meta-analyses showed that no difference between the measurements of CBCT and in situ for alveolar bone loss, and demonstrated a concordance of 82.82% between CBCT and in situ for the classification of the degree of furcation involvement.
Conclusions: Based on a moderate level of evidence, CBCT could be useful for furcation involvement periodontal cases, but it should only be used in cases where clinical evaluation and conventional radiographic imaging do not provide the information necessary for an adequate diagnosis and proper periodontal treatment planning.
Keywords: alveolar bone loss; cone beam computed tomography; furcation defects; periodontal bone loss; systematic review.