Review of online X-ray diagnostic services based on artificial neural networks in dentistry

Aim. This review is devoted to the analysis of available on-line services and programs using artificial neural networks (ANNs) in dentistry, especially for cephalometric analysis.

Materials and methods. We searched for scientific publications in the information and analytical databases PubMed, Google Scholar and eLibrary using combinations of the following keywords: artificial intelligence, deep learning, computer vision, neural network, dentistry, orthodontics, cephalometry, cephalometric analysis. 1612 articles were analyzed, of which 23 publications were included in our review.

Results. Deep machine learning based on ANN has been successfully used in various branches of medicine as an analytical tool for processing various data. ANNs are especially successfully used for image recognition in radiology and histology. In dentistry, computer vision is used to diagnose diseases of the maxillofacial region, plan surgical treatment, including dental implantation, as well as for cephalometric analysis for the needs of orthodontists and maxillofacial surgeons.

Conclusion. Currently, there are many programs and on-line services for cephalometric analysis. However, only 7 of them use ANNs for automatic landmarking and image analysis. Also, there is not enough data to evaluate the accuracy of their work and convenience.

1. Steimann F. On the use and usefulness of fuzzy sets in medical AI. Artif. Intell. Med. 2001; 21 (1–3): 131–137. http://doi.org/10.1016/s0933-3657(00)00077-4

2. McCulloch W.S., Pitts W. A logical calculus of the ideas imminent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 1943; 5: 115–133.

3. Poulton M.M. Computational neural networks for geophysical data processing: Elsevier, 2001. 10 p.

4. Newell A., Simon H.A. Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. Commun. ACM. 1976; 19: 113 126.

5. Nilsson N. The Quest for Artificial Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

6. Rosenblatt F. The Perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Psychol. Rev. 1958; 65: 386–408.

7. Bowling M., Fürnkranz J., Graepel T., Musick R. Machine learning and games. Mach. Learn. 2006; 63: 211 215. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-006-8919-x

8. Werbos P. Beyond regression: new tools for prediction and analysis in the behavioral sciences. PhD Thesis, Harvard University, 1974.

9. Hopfield J.J. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1982; 79: 2554–2558.

10. Park J., Sandberg I.W. Universal approximation using radial-basis-function networks. Neural. Comput. 1991; 3: 246–257.

11. Carpenter G.A., Grossberg S. The ART of adaptive pattern recognition by a self-organizing neural network. Computer. 1988; 21: 77–88.

12. Baxt W.G. Use of an artificial neural network for data analysis in clinical decision-making: the diagnosis of acute coronary occlusion. Neural. Comput. 1990; 2: 480–489.

13. Boon M.E., Kok L.P. Neural network processing can provide means to catch errors that slip through human screening of pap smears. Diagn. Cytopathol. 1993; 9: 411–416.

14. Muraev A.A., Tsai P., Kibardin I. et al. Frontal cephalometric landmarking: humans vs artificial neural networks. Int. J. Comput. Dent. 2020; 23 (2): 139–148.

15. Muraev A.A., Kibardin I.A., Oborotistov N.Yu., Ivanov S.S. Use of neural network algorithms for the automated arrangement of cephalometric markers on lateral cefalograms. REJR. 2018; 8 (4): 16–22. http://doi.org/10.21569/2222-7415-2018-8-2-16-22

16. Ezhov M., Gusarev M., Golitsyna M., et al. Clinically applicable artificial intelligence system for dental diagnosis with CBCT. Sci. Rep. 2021; 11 (1): 15006. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94093-9

17. Solovyh E.A., Obrubov A.A., Arranz I. et al. Artificial Intelligence DENTOMO: Opportunities and Prospects for Interpretation of Cone Beam CT in Dentistry. Bull. Exp. Biol. Med. 2021; 170 (5): 686–688. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10517-021-05133-3

18. Lee J.H., Kim D.H., Jeong S.N., Choi S.H. Detection and diagnosis of dental caries using a deep learning-based convolutional neural network algorithm. J. Dent. 2018; 77: 106–111. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.07.015

19. Kim E.Y., Lim K.O., Rhee H.S. Predictive modeling of dental pain using neural network. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2009; 146: 745 746.

20. Prados-Privado M., García Villalón J., Martínez-Martínez C.H. et al. Dental Caries Diagnosis and Detection Using Neural Networks: A Systematic Review. J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9 (11): 3579. http://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9113579

21. Schwendicke F., Golla T., Dreher M., Krois J. Convolutional neural networks for dental image diagnostics: A scoping review. J. Dent. 2019; 91: 103226. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.103226

22. Orhan K., Bayrakdar I.S., Ezhov M., Kravtsov A., Özyürek T. Evaluation of artificial intelligence for detecting periapical pathosis on cone-beam computed tomography scans. Int. Endod. J. 2020; 53 (5): 680–689. http://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13265

23. Orhan K., Bilgir E., Bayrakdar I.S. et al. Evaluation of artificial intelligence for detecting impacted third molars on cone-beam computed tomography scans. J. Stomatol. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 2021; 122 (4): 333–337. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2020.12.006

24. Bayrakdar K.S., Orhan K., Bayrakdar I.S. et al. A deep learning approach for dental implant planning in conebeam computed tomography images. BMC Med. Imaging. 2021; 21 (1): 86. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-021-00618-z

25. Siddiqui N.R., Hodges S., Sharif M.O. Availability of orthodontic smartphone apps. J. Orthod. 2019; 46 (3): 235–241. http://doi.org/10.1177/1465312519851183

26. Muraev A.A., Guseynov N.A., Tsay P.A., Kibardin I.A., Burenchev D.V., Ivanov S.S., Oborotistov N.Yu., Matuta M.A., Grachev N.S., Larin S.S. Artificial neural networks in dental and maxillofacial radiology: a review. Clinical Dentistry. 2020; 3 (95): 72–80. (In Russian)

27. Broadbent B. A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. Angle Orthod. 1931; 1: 45–66.

28. Wang C.W., Huang C.T., Hsieh M.C. et al. Evaluation and Comparison of Anatomical Landmark Detection Methods for Cephalometric X-Ray Images: A Grand Challenge. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging. 2015; 34 (9): 1890–1900. http://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2015.2412951

29. Wang C.W., Huang C.T., Lee J.H. et al. A benchmark for comparison of dental radiography analysis algorithms. Med. Image Anal. 2016; 31: 63–76. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2016.02.004

30. Alam M.K., Alfawzan A.A. Dental Characteristics of Different Types of Cleft and Non-cleft Individuals. Front. Cell. Dev. Biol. 2020; 8: 789. http://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.00789

31. Yassir Y.A., Salman A.R., Nabbat S.A. The accuracy and reliability of WebCeph for cephalometric analysis. J. Taibah. Univ. Med. Sci. 2021; 17 (1): 57–66. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2021.08.010

32. Alqahtani H. Evaluation of an online website-based platform for cephalometric analysis. J. Stomatol. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 2020; 121 (1): 53–57. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2019.04.017

33. Meriç P., Naoumova J. Web-based Fully Automated Cephalometric Analysis: Comparisons between Appaided, Computerized, and Manual Tracings. Turk. J. Orthod. 2020; 33 (3): 142–149. Published 2020 Aug 11. http://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.20062

34. Silva T.P., Hughes M.M., Menezes L.D.S. et al.Artificial intelligence-based cephalometric landmark annotation and measurements according to Arnett's analysis: can we trust a bot to do that? Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2021; 20200548. http://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20200548

35. Mamta J., Poojita G., Ravinder K. et al. A review on cephalometric landmark detection techniques. Biomed. Signal Processing Control. 2021; 66: 102486. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2021.102486

36. Rao G.K.L., Mokhtar N., Iskandar Y.H.P., Srinivasa A.C. Learning orthodontic cephalometry through augmented reality: A conceptual machine learning validation approach. 2018 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informatics (ICELTICs). 2018; 133–138. http://doi.org/10.1109/ICELTICS.2018.8548939

37. Sawchuk D., Alhadlaq A., Alkhadra T. et al. Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software. J. Orthod. Sci. 2014; 3 (4): 111–117. http://doi.org/10.4103/2278-0203.143230