Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32844259›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2021

Artificial intelligence-driven novel tool for tooth detection and segmentation on panoramic radiographs.

André Ferreira Leite, Adriaan Van Gerven, Holger Willems, Thomas Beznik, Pierre Lahoud, Hugo Gaêta-Araujo, Myrthel Vranckx, Reinhilde Jacobs

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

65 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. The Image Behind the Algorithm.European journal of dentistry · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

André Ferreira LeiteOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. andreleite@unb.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7803-4740
Adriaan Van GervenRelu, Innovatie-en incubatiecentrum KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Holger WillemsRelu, Innovatie-en incubatiecentrum KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Thomas BeznikRelu, Innovatie-en incubatiecentrum KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pierre LahoudOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Hugo Gaêta-AraujoOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Myrthel VranckxOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Reinhilde JacobsOMFS IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leuven and Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 33, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Distrito Federal 23106.013588/2019-05
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the performance of a new artificial intelligence (AI)-driven tool for tooth detection and segmentation on panoramic radiographs. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn total, 153 radiographs were collected. A dentomaxillofacial radiologist labeled and segmented each tooth, serving as the ground truth. Class-agnostic crops with one tooth resulted in 3576 training teeth. The AI-driven tool combined two deep convolutional neural networks with expert refinement. Accuracy of the system to detect and segment teeth was the primary outcome, time analysis secondary. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to evaluate differences of performance metrics among teeth groups and different devices and chi-square test to verify associations among the amount of corrections, presence of false positive and false negative, and crown and root parts of teeth with potential AI misinterpretations.

resultsThe system achieved a sensitivity of 98.9% and a precision of 99.6% for tooth detection. For segmenting teeth, lower canines presented best results with the following values for intersection over union, precision, recall, F1-score, and Hausdorff distances: 95.3%, 96.9%, 98.3%, 97.5%, and 7.9, respectively. Although still above 90%, segmentation results for both upper and lower molars were somewhat lower. The method showed a clinically significant reduction of 67% of the time consumed for the manual.

conclusionsThe AI tool yielded a highly accurate and fast performance for detecting and segmenting teeth, faster than the ground truth alone. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: An innovative clinical AI-driven tool showed a faster and more accurate performance to detect and segment teeth on panoramic radiographs compared with manual segmentation.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceToothMolarNeural Networks, ComputerRadiography, PanoramicArtificial intelligenceClassificationMachine learningPanoramic radiographyTooth

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.