PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 13, 2026Dentomaxillofacial Radiology2 citations

Analysis of the Generalizability of An Artificial Intelligence-Based Software for Tomographic Segmentation of Posterior Teeth—An External Validation Study

View Full Paper
EJErielma Lomba Dias JuliãoGAGabriel Cunha AdiverciFFFernanda Bulhões Fagundes

Key Points

  • This research aims to assess how well an AI software can accurately segment posterior teeth in dental scans and identify factors needing adjustments in segmentations.
  • Analyzed 190 cone beam computed tomography scans from various systems.
  • Dental surgeons refined automatic segmentations that needed correction.
  • Manual segmentation was performed on 20% of the sample for comparison.
  • Performance evaluated using voxel-by-voxel and surface-based analyses and mixed logistic regression.
  • Only 12.7% of the teeth required segmentation refinement.
  • Age and presence of brackets significantly influenced refinement needs.
  • AI software showed high agreement with refined segmentations and excelled in time efficiency compared to manual segmentation.

Abstract

Abstract Objective To evaluate the generalizability of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based software for automated segmentation of posterior teeth in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans and to identify the variables that influence the need for refinement of automatic segmentations (AS). Methods A total of 190 scans from 190 patients, acquired using five CBCT systems were imported into the Virtual Patient Creator (Relu, Leuven, Belgium) for AS. Two dental surgeons qualitatively assessed the segmentations of posterior teeth and refined those requiring correction. Manual segmentation (MS) of 20% of the sample was performed using Mimics software (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). Performance was analyzed through voxel-by-voxel and surface-based comparisons, in addition to the evaluation of time efficiency. Associations between independent variables and the need for refinement were analyzed using mixed logistic regression (α = 5%). Results Among the 1,005 teeth evaluated, only 12.7% required refinement. Age and the presence of brackets were significant predictors (p 0.001). The unexplained variability was attributed mainly to the patients, with minimal influence from the CBCT systems. AS showed agreement with refined segmentations (R-AI) (IoU: 0.93–0.96; DSC: 0.96–0.98; Precision: 0.99–1.00; Recall: 0.94–0.96; Accuracy: 0.98–0.99; MAD: 0.05–0.07; RMSE: 0.06–0.14) and excellent performance compared to MS (IoU: 0.94; DSC: 0.97; Precision: 0.98; Recall: 0.95; Accuracy: 0.98; MAD: 0.05; RMSE: 0.09). AS was more time-efficient (12 AIQ : 5) compared to R-AI (202 AIQ : 334) and MS (1,726 AIQ: 863). Conclusion The AI-based software demonstrated high accuracy and generalizability for automated segmentation of posterior teeth in CBCT scans.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Julião et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69dc88d83afacbeac03eaa34https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twag018
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper