1 Dentist, Orthodontic Postgraduate - University of Cuenca. Cuenca, Ecuador.
2 Professor, Orthodontic Specialist. University of Cuenca. Cuenca, Ecuador.
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 27(03), 363–372x
Article DOI: 10.30574/wjarr.2025.27.3.3138
Received on 29 July 2025; revised on 04 September 2025; accepted on 06 September 2025
Cephalometry is an essential tool in orthodontics for assessing skeletal, dental, and soft tissue relationships. Traditionally, it was performed manually, but with technological advancements, digital tracing software has become available, promising greater speed and reproducibility.
Objective: To compare manual and digital cephalometric tracing in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, time, cost, and clinical impact.
Materials and methods: This study is a narrative review of literature in English and Spanish based on information collected from databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Scielo, and Google Scholar.
Conclusions: The manual method is inexpensive and useful in academic training, but slower and more operator-dependent. The digital method is faster, more reproducible, and facilitates data storage and communication, although it requires an initial investment and training. Both methods are comparable in diagnostic accuracy. The digital method stands out for its efficiency and long-term sustainability, while the manual method retains its pedagogical value and applicability in resource-limited settings.
Cephalometry; Manual Tracing; Digital Analysis; Artificial Intelligence.
Preview Article PDF
Karla Teresita Segovia, Dennis Stalin Ramón, Josselyn Fernanda Riofrio and Valeria del Rosio Siguencia. Comparison of manual vs. Digital cephalometric tracing. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 2025, 27(03), 363–372. Article DOI: https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.27.3.3138.
Copyright © 2025 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0