Artificial Intelligence in Detecting and Segmenting Vertical Misfit of Prosthesis in Radiographic Images of Dental Implants: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Paniz Fasih, Amir Yari, Lotfollah Kamali Hakim, Nader Nasim Kashe
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence in Detecting and Segmenting Vertical Misfit of Prosthesis in Radiographic Images of Dental Implants: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.","authors":"Paniz Fasih, Amir Yari, Lotfollah Kamali Hakim, Nader Nasim Kashe","doi":"10.1111/clr.14406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study evaluated ResNet-50 and U-Net models for detecting and segmenting vertical misfit in dental implant crowns using periapical radiographic images.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Periapical radiographs of dental implant crowns were classified by two experts based on the presence of vertical misfit (reference group). The misfit area was manually annotated in images exhibiting vertical misfit. The resulting datasets were utilized to train the ResNet-50 and U-Net deep learning models. Then, 70% of the images were allocated for training, while the remaining 30% were used for validation and testing. Five general dentists categorized the testing images as \"misfit\" or \"fit.\" Inter-rater reliability with Cohen's kappa index and performance metrics were calculated. The average performance metrics of dentists and artificial intelligence (AI) were compared using the paired-samples t test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 638 radiographs were collected. The kappa values between dentists and AI ranged from 0.93 to 0.98, indicating perfect agreement. The ResNet-50 model achieved accuracy and precision of 92.7% and 87.5%, respectively, whereas dentists had a mean accuracy of 93.3% and precision of 89.6%. The sensitivity and specificity for AI were 90.3% and 93.8%, respectively, compared to 90.1% and 95.1% for dentists. The Dice coefficient yielded 88.9% for the ResNet-50 and 89.5% among the dentists. The U-Net algorithm produced a loss of 0.01 and an accuracy of 0.98. No significant difference was found between the average performance metrics of dentists and AI (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>AI can detect and segment vertical misfit of implant prosthetic crowns in periapical radiographs, comparable to clinician performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":10455,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Implants Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14406","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This study evaluated ResNet-50 and U-Net models for detecting and segmenting vertical misfit in dental implant crowns using periapical radiographic images.
Methods: Periapical radiographs of dental implant crowns were classified by two experts based on the presence of vertical misfit (reference group). The misfit area was manually annotated in images exhibiting vertical misfit. The resulting datasets were utilized to train the ResNet-50 and U-Net deep learning models. Then, 70% of the images were allocated for training, while the remaining 30% were used for validation and testing. Five general dentists categorized the testing images as "misfit" or "fit." Inter-rater reliability with Cohen's kappa index and performance metrics were calculated. The average performance metrics of dentists and artificial intelligence (AI) were compared using the paired-samples t test.
Results: A total of 638 radiographs were collected. The kappa values between dentists and AI ranged from 0.93 to 0.98, indicating perfect agreement. The ResNet-50 model achieved accuracy and precision of 92.7% and 87.5%, respectively, whereas dentists had a mean accuracy of 93.3% and precision of 89.6%. The sensitivity and specificity for AI were 90.3% and 93.8%, respectively, compared to 90.1% and 95.1% for dentists. The Dice coefficient yielded 88.9% for the ResNet-50 and 89.5% among the dentists. The U-Net algorithm produced a loss of 0.01 and an accuracy of 0.98. No significant difference was found between the average performance metrics of dentists and AI (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: AI can detect and segment vertical misfit of implant prosthetic crowns in periapical radiographs, comparable to clinician performance.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Oral Implants Research conveys scientific progress in the field of implant dentistry and its related areas to clinicians, teachers and researchers concerned with the application of this information for the benefit of patients in need of oral implants. The journal addresses itself to clinicians, general practitioners, periodontists, oral and maxillofacial surgeons and prosthodontists, as well as to teachers, academicians and scholars involved in the education of professionals and in the scientific promotion of the field of implant dentistry.