Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Deep learning and clustering approaches for dental implant size classification based on periapical radiographs.
Park, Ji-Hyun; Moon, Hong Seok; Jung, Hoi-In; Hwang, JaeJoon; Choi, Yoon-Ho; Kim, Jong-Eun.
Afiliação
  • Park JH; Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry, Yonsei-ro 50-1, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea.
  • Moon HS; Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry, Yonsei-ro 50-1, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea.
  • Jung HI; Department of Preventive Dentistry and Public Oral Health, Yonsei University College of Dentistry, Seoul, 03722, Korea.
  • Hwang J; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Dental Research Institute, Pusan National University, Busan, 50612, Korea.
  • Choi YH; School of Computer Science and Engineering, Pusan National University, Busan, 46241, Korea.
  • Kim JE; Department of Prosthodontics, Yonsei University College of Dentistry, Yonsei-ro 50-1, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 03722, Korea. gomyou@yuhs.ac.
Sci Rep ; 13(1): 16856, 2023 10 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37803022
ABSTRACT
This study investigated two artificial intelligence (AI) methods for automatically classifying dental implant diameter and length based on periapical radiographs. The first method, deep learning (DL), involved utilizing the pre-trained VGG16 model and adjusting the fine-tuning degree to analyze image data obtained from periapical radiographs. The second method, clustering analysis, was accomplished by analyzing the implant-specific feature vector derived from three key points coordinates of the dental implant using the k-means++ algorithm and adjusting the weight of the feature vector. DL and clustering model classified dental implant size into nine groups. The performance metrics of AI models were accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC). The final DL model yielded performances above 0.994, 0.950, 0.994, 0.974, 0.952, 0.994, and 0.975, respectively, and the final clustering model yielded performances above 0.983, 0.900, 0.988, 0.923, 0.909, 0.988, and 0.947, respectively. When comparing the AI model before tuning and the final AI model, statistically significant performance improvements were observed in six out of nine groups for DL models and four out of nine groups for clustering models based on AUC-ROC. Two AI models showed reliable classification performances. For clinical applications, AI models require validation on various multicenter data.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Aprendizado Profundo Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Implantes Dentários / Aprendizado Profundo Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article