BACKGROUND The use of CBCT exam in the study of IMC is not new. However, it's still not known in what specific aspects CBCT exam shows a better result than then conventional exams. The aim of this study was to compare and conclude in what way the opinion regarding upper canine impaction differed when observing a panoramic image compared to the observation of a set of CBCT reconstructions. METHODS Twenty patients (10 males and 10 females) with a total of 28 impacted maxillary canines were identified from the database of the Department of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra. For each canine, two different images were available: a panoramic image and a set of CBCT reconstructions. After a random distribution of both groups images, nine orthodontists completed a questionnaire where they were asked to evaluate ten different questions regarding canine impaction. Statistic analysis was performed using Cronbach's alpha statistics, Kappa statistics and McNemar test, considering p<0,05 statistically significant. RESULTS This study showed differences between the two images regarding tooth position. A statistical significant poor agreement was found between the two methods for the mesio-distal position of the apex (k=0,388, p<0,001) and for the labio-palatal tip cusp position (k=0,035, p=0,114). The adjacent root resorption showed a poor and very poor agreement between the two methods. Every other items were scored with an agreement between modalities ranging from moderate to strong. CONCLUSIONS The analyses of panoramic images versus CBCT images reconstructions provided different information regarding tooth position (especially concerning the mesio-distal apex position and the labio-palatal cusp position) but also in the assessment of root resorption. Further investigation should be done to determine in what cases CBCT exam has a clear advantage over conventional 2D exams, justifying its use. Key words:Cone-Beam Computed Tomography, Orthodontics, Impacted Tooth, Root resorption.