This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the comparative performance of artificial intelligence (AI) models versus comparators for working-length determination using radiographic or impedance-based inputs. A comprehensive search across seven electronic databases was conducted up to 1 October 2025, identifying five eligible in vitro and ex vivo studies encompassing over 1765 teeth or radiographic images. All the included studies directly compared AI-based approaches with manual or conventional reference standards. An exploratory random-effects meta-analysis demonstrated higher odds of correct working length determination using AI-based methods compared to expert assessment. The risk of bias was moderate to high, primarily because of internal validation and the predominance of laboratory-based study designs. The overall certainty of evidence for the primary outcome was rated low. This first quantitative synthesis suggests that AI-based methods may enhance the consistency of working-length determination under controlled conditions; however, further well-designed clinical studies are required before routine clinical implementation.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Rajinder Bansal
Guru Nanak Dev University
Saurabh Gupta
Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana
Saru Dhir Gupta
Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana
Australian Endodontic Journal
Guru Nanak Dev University
Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana
Kothiwal Dental College and Research Centre
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bansal et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69df2abce4eeef8a2a6afc62 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.70081
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: