RESUMO
Objective: We aimed to investigate the accuracy of remote examination by photographs compared to in-person clinical examination for detecting potentially malignant oral lesions (PMOLs). Methods: The Reporting Guide and Guidelines for Writing Systematic Reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis [PRISMA]) guided the reporting of findings. The search was conducted by two independent reviewers in six databases with no language restriction until November 2022. The Population, Test-Index, Reference Standard, Outcome and Study Design (PIROS) strategy guided the eligibility criteria, and studies with adult patients (P) examined remotely (I) and in-person (R) to verify the detection of PMOLs (O) were considered. The methodological quality was assessed by QUADAS-2, and the certainty of the evidence was measured by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: A total of 769 files were identified. After removing duplicates and reading titles and abstracts, 16 were read in full, from which 6 articles then comprised the qualitative synthesis. The oral clinical examination was the reference standard in four studies. Five studies presented high risk of bias in at least one assessment domain. A high probability of detection of PMOL by remote examination (97.37%) was observed for the three studies included in the meta-analysis, which presented high heterogeneity among them. The certainty of evidence for the outcome was considered very low. Conclusions: Remote tools for detecting PMOLs may be feasible and assertive, but new studies are required to incorporate them into clinical practice. Clinical Relevance: Remote examination for the detection of PMOLs has the potential to favoring the early diagnosis of malignant lesions.
