SynthesisHead & face medicine2026
Diagnostic and prognostic value of (cone-beam) computed tomography in dental sleep medicine for obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Head & face medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesDetermine whether cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) or computed tomography (CT) measurements of the upper airway, craniofacial structures and soft tissues provide diagnostic or prognostic value for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in dental sleep medicine.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Eligible studies until September 2025 included polysomnography or polygraphy confirmed OSA, CBCT- or CT-based measurements, and either PSG/PG-confirmed non-OSA controls, defined OSA severity strata or treatment responder classifications. Data were extracted for diagnostic and therapeutic studies and risk of bias was assessed with the QUIPS tool.
resultsOf 392 records, 11 met inclusion criteria (7 diagnostic, 4 therapeutic). Most were subject to high risk of bias and showed heterogeneity in imaging protocols, measurements and outcome definitions, with little adjustment for age, gender or body mass index. Individuals with OSA often had smaller retropalatal minimum cross-sectional area (CSAmin) whereas findings for retroglossal dimensions, total airway volume, skeletal morphology and soft-tissue measures were inconsistent and lacked clear correlation with disease severity. In therapeutic studies, upper-airway volume generally increased, but baseline CBCT- and CT-derived variables and treatment-related airway enlargement did not reliably distinguish responders from non-responders.
conclusionsAvailable evidence does not support CBCT- and CT-derived airway, skeletal or soft-tissue parameter as useful tools for diagnosing and grading of OSA or predicting treatment response. Given the high radiation exposure associated with both modalities, routine CBCT or CT solely for OSA screening or outcome prediction in dental sleep medicine is not justified and should be limited to established guidelines or surgical planning.
trial registrationPROSPERO ID CRD42024556837.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.