ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Fully automated deep learning for the identification and classification of dental implant brands from multimodal radiographic images.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAccurate radiographic identification of dental implant systems is essential for effective clinical management; however, manual assessment remains time-consuming and susceptible to diagnostic error. Furthermore, conventional computational approaches are constrained by their dependency on manually annotated regions of interest. To overcome these limitations, this study introduces DentalImplantNet, an end-to-end automated deep learning architecture engineered for robust, high-precision implant classification across heterogeneous and radiographically noisy clinical settings. MATERIALS AND
methodsA multi-modal dataset was constructed from 2,714 panoramic and periapical radiographs alongside high-resolution Bruker micro-CT scans of 64 standalone implant fixtures. An automated pipeline utilizing RT-DETR for real-time localization and ROI extraction was implemented to eliminate manual intervention. To enhance robustness, a Causal-Informed Generalization Framework based on Backdoor Adjustment was utilized to dissociate invariant morphological features from non-causal radiographic noise. Model performance was benchmarked against ResNet-50, EfficientNet-B2, and 12 dental professionals who were divided into three levels of expertise.
resultsDentalImplantNet achieved an overall accuracy of 95.29% and a micro-average AUC of 99.6%, significantly outperforming ResNet-50 and EfficientNet-B2, which recorded accuracies of 92.4% and 88.2%, respectively. The model demonstrated high diagnostic stability with an overall F1-score of 94.2% and achieved perfect precision for the Straumann and Osstem categories. In clinical validation, the artificial intelligence (AI) performance substantially surpassed senior implant specialists whose overall and specifically for periapical radiographs did not exceed average numbers of 58% and 53%, respectively. Grad-CAM visualization confirmed that the model prioritized sub-millimeter morphological signatures over transient radiographic artifacts, ensuring high interpretability.
conclusionsThe integration of causal data synthesis with automated deep learning architectures provided a scalable and robust solution for implant identification, effectively minimizing human error in clinical practice. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Automated deep learning models have demonstrated significant potential in assisting dentists with the precise identification of dental implant brands on panoramic and periapical radiographs, thereby facilitating more effective, efficient, and safer clinical management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42622711What 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.