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. Materials and 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