Automating virtual dental implant planning: can artificial intelligence match clinical expertise?

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Bahaaeldeen M Elgarba, Eslam Abdelwahab Dawood, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Pierre Lahoud, Jan Meeus, Reinhilde Jacobs
{"title":"Automating virtual dental implant planning: can artificial intelligence match clinical expertise?","authors":"Bahaaeldeen M Elgarba, Eslam Abdelwahab Dawood, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele, Pierre Lahoud, Jan Meeus, Reinhilde Jacobs","doi":"10.1093/dmfr/twag015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study evaluated a validated artificial intelligence (AI) tool for virtual implant planning by comparing its performance with expert-planned and clinically placed implants in single-tooth rehabilitation cases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pre- and postoperative cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans were retrospectively collected from 32 single-tooth implant cases. Actual implants were placed by expert clinicians using a human intelligence (HI)-based approach guided by the preoperative CBCT. The same scans were used to generate both AI- and HI-based virtual implant plans. Pre- and postoperative scans were registered to allow accurate comparison between placed and planned implants. Three plans were evaluated per case: clinically placed implant (HI-place), HI-planned implant (HI-plan), and AI-planned implant (AI). Evaluations included angular deviation relative to adjacent teeth and prosthetic wax-ups, vertical and horizontal bone thickness, proximity to vital structures, implant dimensions, planning time, and planning repeatability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Friedman test indicated no significant differences in implant location among the 3 approaches (P > .05). Angular deviations were similar across methods for both the neighboring tooth (HI-place = 7.01 ± 4.7°; HI-plan = 7.30 ± 5.6°; AI = 6.86 ± 3.7°) and the wax-up (HI-place = 5.22 ± 3.0°; HI-plan = 4.55 ± 3.0°; AI = 5.50 ± 4.9°). Implant diameter and length selections also did not differ significantly across HI-place (4.06 ± 0.4 mm; 10.61 ± 1.4 mm), HI-plan (4.06 ± 0.4 mm; 10.45 ± 1.4 mm), and AI (4.05 ± 0.5 mm; 10.39 ± 1.4 mm). AI was significantly faster (P < .05), requiring 150 s vs 429 s for HI-plan, and showed excellent repeatability with zero deviation between repeated plans.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>AI-driven virtual implant planning achieved clinically acceptable placement comparable to expert clinicians in single-implant rehabilitation, with superior efficiency and repeatability, supporting its use in routine presurgical workflows.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>Integrating AI for implant location and dimensions selection, with accuracy comparable to expert clinicians, can streamline the digital implant workflow, reduce planning time, and allow clinicians to focus on verifying the AI-generated plan prior to clinical transfer, thereby increasing the time available for the actual treatment procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":11261,"journal":{"name":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","volume":" ","pages":"421-430"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13317984/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dento maxillo facial radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twag015","RegionNum":2,"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

Objectives: This study evaluated a validated artificial intelligence (AI) tool for virtual implant planning by comparing its performance with expert-planned and clinically placed implants in single-tooth rehabilitation cases.

Methods: Pre- and postoperative cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans were retrospectively collected from 32 single-tooth implant cases. Actual implants were placed by expert clinicians using a human intelligence (HI)-based approach guided by the preoperative CBCT. The same scans were used to generate both AI- and HI-based virtual implant plans. Pre- and postoperative scans were registered to allow accurate comparison between placed and planned implants. Three plans were evaluated per case: clinically placed implant (HI-place), HI-planned implant (HI-plan), and AI-planned implant (AI). Evaluations included angular deviation relative to adjacent teeth and prosthetic wax-ups, vertical and horizontal bone thickness, proximity to vital structures, implant dimensions, planning time, and planning repeatability.

Results: The Friedman test indicated no significant differences in implant location among the 3 approaches (P > .05). Angular deviations were similar across methods for both the neighboring tooth (HI-place = 7.01 ± 4.7°; HI-plan = 7.30 ± 5.6°; AI = 6.86 ± 3.7°) and the wax-up (HI-place = 5.22 ± 3.0°; HI-plan = 4.55 ± 3.0°; AI = 5.50 ± 4.9°). Implant diameter and length selections also did not differ significantly across HI-place (4.06 ± 0.4 mm; 10.61 ± 1.4 mm), HI-plan (4.06 ± 0.4 mm; 10.45 ± 1.4 mm), and AI (4.05 ± 0.5 mm; 10.39 ± 1.4 mm). AI was significantly faster (P < .05), requiring 150 s vs 429 s for HI-plan, and showed excellent repeatability with zero deviation between repeated plans.

Conclusions: AI-driven virtual implant planning achieved clinically acceptable placement comparable to expert clinicians in single-implant rehabilitation, with superior efficiency and repeatability, supporting its use in routine presurgical workflows.

Advances in knowledge: Integrating AI for implant location and dimensions selection, with accuracy comparable to expert clinicians, can streamline the digital implant workflow, reduce planning time, and allow clinicians to focus on verifying the AI-generated plan prior to clinical transfer, thereby increasing the time available for the actual treatment procedure.

自动化虚拟牙种植体植入:人工智能可以匹配临床专业知识吗?
目的:本研究通过比较专家计划种植体和临床放置种植体在单牙康复病例中的表现,评估了一种经过验证的人工智能(AI)虚拟种植计划工具。方法:回顾性收集32例单牙种植体术前和术后的ct扫描资料。实际的植入物由专家临床医生使用基于人类智能(HI)的方法在术前CBCT的指导下放置。同样的扫描被用于生成基于AI和hi的虚拟植入计划。术前和术后扫描记录,以便准确比较放置和计划的植入物。每个病例评估三种计划:临床放置种植体(HI-place), hi -计划种植体(HI-plan)和AI-计划种植体(AI)。评估包括相对于邻近牙齿和假体上蜡的角度偏差、垂直和水平骨厚度、与重要结构的接近程度、种植体尺寸、计划时间和计划可重复性。结果:Friedman检验显示三种入路种植体定位无显著差异(p < 0.05)。邻牙(HI-place=7.01±4.7°;HI-plan=7.30±5.6°;AI = 6.86±3.7°)和上蜡牙(HI-place=5.22±3.0°;HI-plan=4.55±3.0°;AI = 5.50±4.9°)不同方法的角度偏差相似。种植体直径和长度的选择在HI-place(4.06±0.4 mm; 10.61±1.4 mm)、HI-plan(4.06±0.4 mm; 10.45±1.4 mm)和AI(4.05±0.5 mm; 10.39±1.4 mm)之间也没有显著差异。结论:人工智能驱动的虚拟种植体计划实现了临床可接受的放置,与单种植体康复的专家临床医生相比,具有更高的效率和可重复性,支持其在常规外科工作流程中的使用。知识进步:将人工智能集成到植入物定位和尺寸选择中,其准确性可与专家临床医生相媲美,可以简化数字植入物工作流程,减少计划时间,使临床医生能够在临床转移之前专注于验证人工智能生成的计划,从而增加实际治疗程序的可用时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
65
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (DMFR) is the journal of the International Association of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (IADMFR) and covers the closely related fields of oral radiology and head and neck imaging. Established in 1972, DMFR is a key resource keeping dentists, radiologists and clinicians and scientists with an interest in Head and Neck imaging abreast of important research and developments in oral and maxillofacial radiology. The DMFR editorial board features a panel of international experts including Editor-in-Chief Professor Ralf Schulze. Our editorial board provide their expertise and guidance in shaping the content and direction of the journal. Quick Facts: - 2015 Impact Factor - 1.919 - Receipt to first decision - average of 3 weeks - Acceptance to online publication - average of 3 weeks - Open access option - ISSN: 0250-832X - eISSN: 1476-542X
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书