PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2026Dentomaxillofacial Radiology0 citations

Automated tooth numbering on panoramic radiographs versus cone-beam computed tomographs: A diagnostic accuracy study of a commercial artificial intelligence system

View Full Paper
NSNora SultaniNKNatalia KazimierczakZSZbigniew Serafin

Key Points

  • To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of an AI system for automated tooth numbering on two imaging modalities.
  • Retrospective single-centre diagnostic accuracy study involving patients receiving both imaging types in 2024.
  • Index test involved automated tooth numbering by Diagnocat using the Fédération Dentaire Internationale numbering scheme.
  • Performance metrics were assessed using patient-level cluster bootstrap analysis.
  • Accuracy for panoramic radiographs was 99.79% and 99.80% for cone-beam computed tomography.
  • 154 out of 178 (86.5%) panoramic exams and 156 out of 174 (89.7%) cone-beam exams showed completely error-free numbering.
  • A significant gap exists between high accuracy rates and the need for manual corrections in about one in ten cases.

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To assess the diagnostic accuracy of a commercial artificial intelligence system for automated tooth numbering on panoramic radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography and to quantify case-level reliability. Methods In this retrospective single-centre diagnostic accuracy study, consecutive patients who underwent both panoramic radiography and cone-beam computed tomography in 2024 were included. The index test was automated tooth numbering generated by Diagnocat using the Fédération Dentaire Internationale numbering scheme. The reference standard was modality-specific consensus of two experienced, blinded readers. Tooth-position performance metrics with 95% confidence intervals were estimated using patient-level cluster bootstrap. Case-level reliability was defined as the proportion of examinations with completely error-free numbering across all evaluated tooth positions. Results The study analysed 178 panoramic radiographs and 174 cone-beam computed tomography examinations. Tooth-position performance was near-perfect and similar across modalities (overall accuracy 99.79% for panoramic radiographs and 99.80% for cone-beam computed tomography). At the case level, 154/178 (86.5%) panoramic radiographs and 156/174 (89.7%) cone-beam computed tomography examinations were error-free. Conclusions Despite near-perfect tooth-position metrics, approximately one in ten to one in seven examinations required at least one manual correction, demonstrating a gap between granular accuracy and case-level reliability. Advances in knowledge Reporting case-level, error-free outputs alongside tooth-position metrics provides a more clinically meaningful estimate of reliability for automated tooth numbering and supports safer workflow implementation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sultani et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095ba67880e6d24efe1791https://doi.org/10.1093/dmfr/twag026
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper