ArticleMaedica2026
AI Prediction of Bone Graft Integration Success Using CBCT Datasets in Simulated Peri-Implant Defect.
Article in Maedica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The integration of bone grafts is a determinant factor for achieving the success of implants and the outcome of healing is hard to predict. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds potential in the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image analysis to predict regenerative outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to create and test a deep learning model to engage the success of bone graft integration in the case of simulated peri-implant defects in CBCT datasets. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study based on data of 847 CBCT scans of patients who experienced loss of soft tissues around the implant due to bone grafting operations. The 12-month radiographic and clinical outcomes have been used to classify defects into successful (n=512) and unsuccessful integration (n=335). ResNet-50 built on transfer learning was proposed as a convolutional neural network (CNN). The data were separated into training (70%), validation (15%) and testing (15%) sets. The performance of the models was compared in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and F1-score. Results: The AI model had an overall accuracy of 87.3 ± 2.1, a sensitivity of 89.6 ± 1.8, a specificity of 84.2 ± 2.4 and an AUC-ROC of 0.912 ± 0.023. It was found that defect morphology classification had a high predictive ability and circumferential defects exhibited a better prediction ability (91.2) than dehiscence-type defects (82.7) (p <0.01). The model showed better results than clinical assessment (87.3% vs. 71.4% p<0.001). Conclusion: The created AI model exhibits strong predictive power of bone graft integration success based on CBCT scans, which could provide a means to plan the treatment individually and make more effective clinical decisions in the field of implant dentistry.
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.