Super-Resolution of Dental Panoramic Radiographs Using Deep Learning: A Pilot Study.

Using super-resolution (SR) algorithms, an image with a low resolution can be converted into a high-quality image. Our objective was to compare deep learning-based SR models to a conventional approach for improving the resolution of dental panoramic radiographs. A total of 888 dental panoramic radiographs were obtained. Our study involved five state-of-the-art deep learning-based SR approaches, including SR convolutional neural networks (SRCNN), SR generative adversarial network (SRGAN), U-Net, Swin for image restoration (SwinIr), and local texture estimator (LTE). Their results were compared with one another and with conventional bicubic interpolation. The performance of each model was evaluated using the metrics of mean squared error (MSE), peak signal-to-noise ratio (PNSR), structural similarity index (SSIM), and mean opinion score by four experts (MOS). Among all the models evaluated, the LTE model presented the highest performance, with MSE, SSIM, PSNR, and MOS results of 7.42 ± 0.44, 39.74 ± 0.17, 0.919 ± 0.003, and 3.59 ± 0.54, respectively. Additionally, compared with low-resolution images, the output of all the used approaches showed significant improvements in MOS evaluation. A significant enhancement in the quality of panoramic radiographs can be achieved by SR. The LTE model outperformed the other models.

Deep learning in periodontology and oral implantology: A scoping review.

Deep learning (DL) has been employed for a wide range of tasks in dentistry. We aimed to systematically review studies employing DL for periodontal and implantological purposes. A systematic electronic search was conducted on four databases (Medline via PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase) and a repository (ArXiv) for publications after 2010, without any limitation on language. In the present review, we included studies that reported deep learning models' performance on periodontal or oral implantological tasks. Given the heterogeneities in the included studies, no meta-analysis was performed. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We included 47 studies: focusing on imaging data (n = 20) and non-imaging data in periodontology (n = 12), or dental implantology (n = 15). The detection of periodontitis and gingivitis or periodontal bone loss, the classification of dental implant systems, or the prediction of treatment outcomes in periodontology and implantology were major use cases. The performance of the models was generally high. However, it varied given the employed methods (which includes various types of convolutional neural networks (CNN) and multi-layered perceptron (MLP)), the variety in specific modeling tasks, as well as the chosen and reported outcomes, outcome measures and outcome level. Only a few studies (n = 7) showed a low risk of bias across all assessed domains. A growing number of studies evaluated DL for periodontal or implantological objectives. Heterogeneity in study design, poor reporting and a high risk of bias severely limit the comparability of studies and the robustness of the overall evidence.

Deep learning for caries detection: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Detecting caries lesions is challenging for dentists, and deep learning models may help practitioners to increase accuracy and reliability. We aimed to systematically review deep learning studies on caries detection. DATA: We selected diagnostic accuracy studies that used deep learning models on dental imagery (including radiographs, photographs, optical coherence tomography images, near-infrared light transillumination images). The latest version of the quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used for risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in the studies methods and their performance measurements. SOURCES: Databases (Medline via PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase) and a repository (ArXiv) were screened for publications published after 2010, without any limitation on language. STUDY SELECTION: From 252 potentially eligible references, 48 studies were assessed full-text and 42 included, using classification (n = 26), object detection (n = 6), or segmentation models (n = 10). A wide range of performance metrics was used; image, object or pixel accuracy ranged between 68%-99%. The minority of studies (n = 11) showed a low risk of biases in all domains, and 13 studies (31.0%) low risk for concerns regarding applicability. The accuracy of caries classification models varied, i.e. 71% to 96% on intra-oral photographs, 82% to 99.2% on peri-apical radiographs, 87.6% to 95.4% on bitewing radiographs, 68.0% to 78.0% on near-infrared transillumination images, 88.7% to 95.2% on optical coherence tomography images, and 86.1% to 96.1% on panoramic radiographs. Pooled diagnostic odds ratios varied from 2.27 to 32,767. For detection and segmentation models, heterogeneity in reporting did not allow useful pooling. CONCLUSION: An increasing number of studies investigated caries detection using deep learning, with a diverse types of architectures being employed. Reported accuracy seems promising, while study and reporting quality are currently low. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Deep learning models can be considered as an assistant for decisions regarding the presence or absence of carious lesions.

Deep learning for the classification of cervical maturation degree and pubertal growth spurts: A pilot study.

Objective: This study aimed to present and evaluate a new deep learning model for determining cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) degree and growth spurts by analyzing lateral cephalometric radiographs. Methods: The study sample included 890 cephalograms. The images were classified into six cervical stages independently by two orthodontists. The images were also categorized into three degrees on the basis of the growth spurt: pre-pubertal, growth spurt, and post-pubertal. Subsequently, the samples were fed to a transfer learning model implemented using the Python programming language and PyTorch library. In the last step, the test set of cephalograms was randomly coded and provided to two new orthodontists in order to compare their diagnosis to the artificial intelligence (AI) model's performance using weighted kappa and Cohen's kappa statistical analyses. Results: The model's validation and test accuracy for the six-class CVM diagnosis were 62.63% and 61.62%, respectively. Moreover, the model's validation and test accuracy for the three-class classification were 75.76% and 82.83%, respectively. Furthermore, substantial agreements were observed between the two orthodontists as well as one of them and the AI model. Conclusions: The newly developed AI model had reasonable accuracy in detecting the CVM stage and high reliability in detecting the pubertal stage. However, its accuracy was still less than that of human observers. With further improvements in data quality, this model should be able to provide practical assistance to practicing dentists in the future.