Scholarlink

Background <p>Detecting the second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal in maxillary first molars is challenging, even with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Artificial intelligence (AI), especially deep learning, has been explored as a tool to aid detection.</p> Objectives <p>This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of AI in identifying MB2 canals on CBCT.</p> Methods <p>Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive electronic search across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus Secondary) retrieved 52 articles. After removing duplicates and screening titles/abstracts, 7 full texts were assessed, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. Studies were eligible if they applied AI algorithms for MB2 detection in CBCT images and reported diagnostic performance outcomes. Data extraction included study design, dataset size, AI model architecture, and diagnostic metrics. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic, and publication bias was evaluated with Egger’s test.</p> Results <p>Four studies were included. AI models achieved a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 and specificity of 0.74. Deep learning models outperformed traditional machine learning, with higher sensitivity (0.87 vs. 0.80), specificity (0.90 vs. 0.68), and accuracy (0.84 vs. 0.75). Considerable heterogeneity and small sample sizes limited generalizability.</p> Conclusion <p>AI, particularly deep learning, shows promise in detecting MB2 canals on CBCT. While current evidence is preliminary, standardised AI training and reporting protocols, together with larger multicenter studies, are needed to validate these tools. Clinically, AI could serve as a supplementary aid to improve diagnostic consistency and reduce missed canals during endodontic treatment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Use of artificial intelligence for detection of MB2 canals in maxillary first molars on CBCT: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月1日

查看全文
  • Mahmood Dashti,
  • Farshad Khosraviani,
  • Niloofar Ghadimi,
  • Kimia Baghaei,
  • Sara Esmaeili,
  • Mahjube Entezar-e-Ghaem,
  • Zohaib Khurshid,
  • Thanaphum Osathanon

摘要

Background

Detecting the second mesiobuccal (MB2) canal in maxillary first molars is challenging, even with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Artificial intelligence (AI), especially deep learning, has been explored as a tool to aid detection.

Objectives

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of AI in identifying MB2 canals on CBCT.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive electronic search across five databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus Secondary) retrieved 52 articles. After removing duplicates and screening titles/abstracts, 7 full texts were assessed, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria. Studies were eligible if they applied AI algorithms for MB2 detection in CBCT images and reported diagnostic performance outcomes. Data extraction included study design, dataset size, AI model architecture, and diagnostic metrics. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic, and publication bias was evaluated with Egger’s test.

Results

Four studies were included. AI models achieved a pooled sensitivity of 0.82 and specificity of 0.74. Deep learning models outperformed traditional machine learning, with higher sensitivity (0.87 vs. 0.80), specificity (0.90 vs. 0.68), and accuracy (0.84 vs. 0.75). Considerable heterogeneity and small sample sizes limited generalizability.

Conclusion

AI, particularly deep learning, shows promise in detecting MB2 canals on CBCT. While current evidence is preliminary, standardised AI training and reporting protocols, together with larger multicenter studies, are needed to validate these tools. Clinically, AI could serve as a supplementary aid to improve diagnostic consistency and reduce missed canals during endodontic treatment.