SynthesisFrontiers in dental medicine2025
Application and performance of artificial intelligence-based models in the detection, segmentation and classification of periapical lesions: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in dental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- A Deep Learning Model for Second-Molar Lesions Related to Impacted Third Molars.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Evaluating Artificial Intelligence in Full-Arch CBCT Caries Detection: A Comparative Analysis with Clinical Assessment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AI-Based Detection of Periapical Lesions in Endodontic Radiographs: a Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Maedica · 2026Article
- Performance of artificial intelligence models designed as adjuncts for determining working length and apical landmark assessment in endodontic procedures: a systematic review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Periapical lesions appear as periapical radiolucency on various imaging modalities. The accuracy of dentists in diagnosing periapical radiolucency varies significantly. Recent scientific and technological advancements have enabled the development and evaluation of artificial intelligence (AI) systems for various diagnostic applications in dentistry. Objectives: The aim was to report on the application and performance of AI-based models in the detection, segmentation, and classification of periapical lesions. Methods and methods: A systematic effort for data acquisition began with an exploration of a wide range of reputable databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Saudi Digital Library. Our comprehensive investigation spanned from 1st January 2000 to 31st March 2025. Results: Twenty-eight articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Among these, 20 (71.4%) applied AI technology for automated detection, 3 (10.7%) for segmentation, 2 (7.2%) for periapical lesion detection and segmentation, and 3 (10.7%) for periapical lesion classification. Thirteen (46.5%) studies in this review utilized dental panoramic radiographs, 8 (28.5%) used intraoral radiographs (periapical and bitewing), and 7 (25%) employed CBCT scans. The AI models demonstrated an accuracy range of 70% to 99.65%, with sensitivity varying from 65% to 100% and specificity ranging from 62% to 100%. The risk of bias assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool, indicated 32.1% of the studies exhibited a significant risk of bias regarding the assessment of bias and applicability issues in the reference standard arm. While the certainty of evidence was evaluated through the GRADE approach, which indicated that the included studies demonstrated a moderate degree of evidence certainty. Conclusions: According to the results of the studies presented, AI-based technologies hold significant potential to assist clinicians and enhance the reliability of clinical diagnoses, enabling less experienced clinicians to identify lesions with greater accuracy. However, prospective studies and randomized clinical trials are essential to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-efficiency of deep learning-based lesion detection in real clinical settings. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD420251011455.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.