OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic yield of dental radiography (Rad method) and cone-beam CT (CBCT) methods for the identification of 31 predefined dental disorders in brachycephalic dogs. ANIMALS 19 client-owned brachycephalic dogs admitted for evaluation and treatment of dental disease. PROCEDURES 31 predefined dental disorders were evaluated separately and scored by use of dental radiography and 3 CBCT software modules (serial CBCT slices and custom cross sections, tridimensional rendering, and reconstructed panoramic views). A qualitative scoring system was used. Dental disorders were grouped into 10 categories for statistical analysis. Point of reference for presence or absence of a dental disorder was determined as the method that could be used to clearly identify the disorder as being present. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated with the McNemar χ2 test of marginal homogeneity of paired data. RESULTS When all 3 CBCT methods were used in combination, the diagnostic yield of CBCT was significantly higher than that of dental radiography for 4 of 10 categories (abnormal eruption, abnormally shaped roots, periodontitis, and tooth resorption) and higher, although not significantly so, for all categories, except for 1 (loss of tooth integrity). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE CBCT provided more detailed information than did dental radiography. Therefore, CBCT would be better suited for use in diagnosing dental disorders in brachycephalic dogs.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the diagnostic yield of dental radiography (Rad method) and 3 cone-beam CT (CBCT) methods for the identification of predefined anatomic landmarks in brachycephalic dogs. ANIMALS 19 client-owned brachycephalic dogs admitted for evaluation and treatment of dental disease. PROCEDURES 26 predefined anatomic landmarks were evaluated separately by use of the RAD method and 3 CBCT software modules (serial CBCT slices and custom cross sections, tridimensional rendering, and reconstructed panoramic views). A semiquantitative scoring system was used, and mean scores were calculated for each anatomic landmark and imaging method. The Friedman test was used to evaluate values for significant differences in diagnostic yield. For values that were significant, the Wilcoxon signed rank test was used with the Bonferroni-Holm multiple comparison adjustment to determine significant differences among each of the 6 possible pairs of diagnostic methods. RESULTS Differences of diagnostic yield among the Rad and 3 CBCT methods were significant for 19 of 26 anatomic landmarks. For these landmarks, Rad scores were significantly higher than scores for reconstructed panoramic views for 4 of 19 anatomic landmarks, but Rad scores were significantly lower than scores for reconstructed panoramic views for 8 anatomic landmarks, tridimensional rendering for 18 anatomic landmarks, and serial CBCT slices and custom cross sections for all 19 anatomic landmarks. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE CBCT methods were better suited than dental radiography for the identification of anatomic landmarks in brachycephalic dogs. Results of this study can serve as a basis for CBCT evaluation of dental disorders in brachycephalic dogs.