Accuracy of computer-assisted image analysis in the diagnosis of maxillofacial radiolucent lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to search for scientific evidence concerning the accuracy of computer-assisted analysis for diagnosing maxillofacial radiolucent lesions. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the statements of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Protocols and considering 10 databases, including the gray literature. Protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42018089945). The population, intervention, comparison and outcome strategy was used to define the eligibility criteria and only diagnostic test studies were included. Their risk of bias was assessed by the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool. Random-effects model meta-analysis was performed and heterogeneity among the included studies was estimated using the I2 statistic. The grade of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) tool assessed the quality of evidence and strength of recommendation across included studies. RESULTS: Out of 715 identified citations, four papers, published between 2009 and 2017, fulfilled the criteria and were included in this systematic review. A total of 191 lesions, classified as periapical granuloma and cyst, dentigerous cyst or keratocystic odontogenic tumor, were analyzed. All selected articles scored low risk of bias. The pooled accuracy estimation, regardless of the classification method used, was 88.75% (95% CI = 85.19-92.30). Heterogeneity test reached moderate values (I2 = 57.89%). According to the GRADE tool, the analyzed outcome was classified as having low level of certainty. CONCLUSIONS: The overall evaluation showed all studies presented high accuracy rates of computer-aided diagnosis systems in classifying radiolucent maxillofacial lesions compared to histopathological biopsy. However, due to the moderate heterogeneity found among the studies included in this meta-analysis, a pragmatic recommendation about the use of computer-assisted analysis is not possible.

Aggression Using a Knife or Other Sharp Instruments and Oral-Maxillofacial Trauma: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Epidemiologic Trends.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to characterize the profile of victims of interpersonal physical violence (IPV) caused by a knife or other sharp instrument, identify the factors associated with maxillofacial trauma, and examine the incidence of maxillofacial trauma over time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, we evaluated 569 medicolegal and social records of IPV victims by knife or other sharp instruments treated at a forensic medicine and dentistry center in Brazil during a 4-year consecutive period. The variables investigated were related to the sociodemographic characteristics of the victims, circumstances of the aggression, and trauma patterns. Descriptive and multivariate statistics through Poisson regression and trend analysis with the creation of polynomial regression models were used. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of oral-maxillofacial trauma was 19.3%. The mean age of the victims was 31.29 ± 13.82 years. Cases of trauma affecting more than one region of the face prevailed (45.5%). Based on the final Poisson regression model, unemployed people were more likely to exhibit maxillofacial trauma (relative risk [RR] 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-3.35; P = .039). In addition, individuals were more likely to experience maxillofacial trauma on Wednesdays (RR 1.85; 95% CI 1.01-3.37; P = .045). The trend analysis revealed a significant increase in oral-maxillofacial injuries over time (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of oral-maxillofacial trauma was high, and the main factors associated with trauma were the victim's employment status and day of occurrence. Future studies will focus on assessing the effect of maxillofacial trauma on the quality of life and well-being of violence victims.