The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Caries Detection: A Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. AI Techniques for Caries Detection
1.1.1. Image-Based Caries Detection Using AI
- Artificial neural networks (ANNs): ANNs are computational models inspired by the human brain’s neural networks. They consist of interconnected nodes (neurons) that process information in layers. In dental caries detection, ANNs analyze patterns in radiographic images to identify carious lesions. They have been shown to achieve high accuracy, making them valuable tools for dental diagnostics [19,20].
- Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs): CNNs are a type of deep learning model specifically designed for image processing. They use convolutional layers to automatically extract features from images, making them highly effective for analyzing dental radiographs [21]. CNNs have been widely used in caries detection due to their ability to accurately identify and classify carious lesions, particularly in subtle areas that traditional methods may miss. They are highly effective in image and video analyses, natural language processing, and various other domains requiring pattern recognition [22]. These networks excel in identifying local patterns and distinctive features in images through several layers of convolutional and pooling processes, enabling the differentiation between carious and non-carious lesions [23,24].
- Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (DCNNs): DCNNs are advanced forms of CNNs that use multiple layers of convolutional and pooling operations to capture complex patterns in images. These models have been applied to various dental imaging modalities, such as bitewing and panoramic radiographs, to detect and diagnose dental caries. DCNNs have demonstrated high accuracy and reliability, making them a preferred choice for many researchers [25,26].
- Machine Learning (ML) Algorithms: Beyond neural networks, other ML algorithms such as random forest, Gradient Boosting, and Support Vector Machines (SVMs) have been used for caries detection. These algorithms analyze large datasets to identify patterns and predict the presence of carious lesions. ML models are valuable for their ability to handle diverse data types and provide robust predictions [27,28].
- Image Processing Techniques: Image processing techniques are crucial in AI-based caries detection. These techniques involve enhancing image quality, segmenting regions of interest, and extracting relevant features. Methods such as noise reduction, contrast enhancement, and edge detection are commonly used to preprocess dental images before AI model analysis. An improved image quality enables more accurate and reliable caries detection.
1.1.2. AI-Assisted Caries-Risk Assessment
1.1.3. Integration of AI with Computer-Aided Diagnosis (CAD) Systems
1.2. Datasets and Annotations for AI in Caries Detection
1.3. Performance Evaluation of AI Models
- Sensitivity: This includes the percentage of actual positive cases that are identified as positives, as opposed to those classified as false negatives. The formula used for sensitivity is
- Specificity: This includes the percentage of actual negatives that are correctly identified by the model. The formula for specificity is
- Precision: This includes the percentage of positive cases that are true positives, as opposed to false positives. The formula used for precision is
- F1 score: This provides an average of the sensitivity and precision values. It is calculated as
- Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis: The ROC curve is a graphical representation that illustrates the model’s performance by plotting the true-positive rate (sensitivity) against the false-positive rate (1—specificity). Analyzing the ROC curve helps in selecting the optimal threshold that balances accurate and inaccurate predictions.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Selection of Resources
2.2. Eligibility Criteria
- Inclusion criteria
- Articles focusing on artificial intelligence applied in caries detection.
- Articles with measurable or predictive outcomes to enable quantification.
- Articles that properly mentioned the datasets used in assessing the model.
- Exclusion criteria
- Articles not written in English.
- Unpublished articles that could not be accessed.
- Articles with only abstracts and not full texts.
2.3. Sources of Data
2.4. Achieving Results
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Detection and Diagnosis of Caries
4.2. Prediction of Caries
4.3. Caries-Risk Assessment
4.4. Comparative Analysis
4.5. Clinical Implications
4.6. Challenges and Limitations
4.7. Prospects and Future Directions
- The enhancement of detection accuracy: AI algorithms, particularly those utilizing deep learning techniques, can analyze radiographic images with remarkable precision. These algorithms are trained on vast datasets of dental images, enabling them to identify early signs of caries that might be subtle or challenging for the human eye to detect. By learning from a multitude of patterns and anomalies, AI systems can provide highly accurate assessments of carious lesions, which can help in detecting caries at an earlier stage than traditional methods.
- Improved efficiency and reduced time: AI tools can process and analyze dental images much faster than manual methods. This speed reduces the time clinicians spend on diagnosis, allowing them to focus more on patient care and treatment planning. For instance, AI-powered systems can provide instant feedback during radiographic evaluations, streamlining the diagnostic process and enabling quicker decision making.
- A consistent and objective analysis: One of the key advantages of AI in caries detection is its ability to deliver consistent and objective analyses. Unlike human practitioners, AI algorithms do not experience fatigue or variability in performance. This consistency ensures that caries detection remains reliable across different cases and practitioners, minimizing the risk of oversight and improving the overall diagnostic accuracy.
- Enhanced treatment planning: AI systems can integrate data from various sources, including patient history, radiographs, and clinical notes, to provide comprehensive insights into carious lesions. This integration supports more informed treatment planning by offering detailed risk assessments and predictive analytics. As a result, clinicians can tailor treatment plans to the specific needs of each patient, potentially improving outcomes and reducing the need for invasive procedures.
- Patient benefits: For patients, AI-driven caries detection can lead to an earlier diagnosis and less-invasive treatments. Early detection often results in less-extensive restorations, preserving more of the natural tooth structure and improving long-term dental health. Moreover, the increased accuracy and efficiency of AI can reduce the frequency of unnecessary follow-up appointments and procedures, enhancing the overall patient experience.
- Training and support for clinicians: AI tools can also serve as valuable educational resources for dental professionals. By providing real-time feedback and analyses, AI systems can help clinicians refine their diagnostic skills and stay updated with the latest advancements in caries detection. This continuous learning support contributes to professional development and ensures that practitioners can deliver the highest standard of care.
- Algorithm improvements: Continued research is needed to enhance the accuracy and reliability of AI algorithms. This includes developing more robust models that can handle diverse patient populations and varying image qualities.
- Integrations with other diagnostic tools: investigating how AI can be integrated with other diagnostic modalities, such as optical coherence tomography or intraoral scanners, could provide a more comprehensive approach to caries detection.
- Long-term-impact studies: research should focus on the long-term effects of AI integration on patient outcomes, treatment efficacy, and overall dental practice efficiency.
4.8. Ethical and Regulatory Considerations
4.9. Strengths and Limitations of This Review
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Selwitz, R.H.; Ismail, A.I.; Pitts, N.B. Dental caries. Lancet 2007, 369, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2018, 392, 1789–1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rathee, M.; Sapra, A. Dental Caries. In StatPearls; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Ghodasra, R.; Brizuela, M. Dental Caries Diagnostic Testing. In StatPearls; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Carey, C.M. Focus on fluorides: Update on the use of fluoride for the prevention of dental caries. J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract. 2014, 14, 95–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Featherstone, J.D. Remineralization, the natural caries repair process—The need for new approaches. Adv. Dent. Res. 2009, 21, 4–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spaveras, A.; Tsakanikou, A.; Karkazi, F.; Antoniadou, M. Caries detection with laser fluorescence devices. Limitations of their use. Stomatol. Edu J. 2017, 4, 44–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zandona, A.F.; Zero, D.T. Diagnostic tools for early caries detection. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2006, 137, 1675–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pontes, L.R.A.; Lara, J.S.; Novaes, T.F.; Freitas, J.G.; Gimenez, T.; Moro, B.L.P.; Maia, H.C.M.; Imparato, J.C.P.; Braga, M.M.; Raggio, D.P.; et al. Negligible therapeutic impact, false-positives, overdiagnosis and lead-time are the reasons why radiographs bring more harm than benefits in the caries diagnosis of preschool children. BMC Oral Heal. 2021, 21, 168. [Google Scholar]
- Pretty, I.A. Caries detection and diagnosis: Novel technologies. J. Dent. 2006, 34, 727–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pontes, L.R.A.; Novaes, T.F.; Moro, B.L.P.; Braga, M.M.; Mendes, F.M. Clinical performance of fluorescence-based methods for detection of occlusal caries lesions in primary teeth. Braz. Oral. Res. 2017, 31, e91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morita, I.N.H.; Nonoyama, K.; Robinson, C. DIAGNOdent values of occlusal surface in the first permanent molar in vivo (abstract 45)—49th ORCA Congress. Caries Res. 2002, 36, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheehy, E.C.; Brailsford, S.R.; Kidd, E.A.; Beighton, D.; Zoitopoulos, L. Comparison between visual examination and a laser fluorescence system for in vivo diagnosis of occlusal caries. Caries Res. 2001, 35, 421–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walsh, T.; Macey, R.; Riley, P.; Glenny, A.M.; Schwendicke, F.; Worthington, H.V.; Clarkson, J.E.; Ricketts, D.; Su, T.L.; Sengupta, A. Imaging modalities to inform the detection and diagnosis of early caries. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2021, 3, CD014545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Anwar, S.M.; Majid, M.; Qayyum, A.; Awais, M.; Alnowami, M.; Khan, M.K. Medical Image Analysis using Convolutional Neural Networks: A Review. J. Med. Syst. 2018, 42, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mertens, S.; Krois, J.; Cantu, A.G.; Arsiwala, L.T.; Schwendicke, F. Artificial intelligence for caries detection: Randomized trial. J. Dent. 2021, 115, 103849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cantu, A.G.; Gehrung, S.; Krois, J.; Chaurasia, A.; Rossi, J.G.; Gaudin, R.; Elhennawy, K.; Schwendicke, F. Detecting caries lesions of different radiographic extension on bitewings using deep learning. J. Dent. 2020, 100, 103425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuhnisch, J.; Meyer, O.; Hesenius, M.; Hickel, R.; Gruhn, V. Caries Detection on Intraoral Images Using Artificial Intelligence. J. Dent. Res. 2022, 101, 158–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Araujo Faria, V.; Azimbagirad, M.; Viani Arruda, G.; Fernandes Pavoni, J.; Cezar Felipe, J.; Dos Santos, E.; Murta Junior, L.O. Prediction of Radiation-Related Dental Caries Through PyRadiomics Features and Artificial Neural Network on Panoramic Radiography. J. Digit. Imaging 2021, 34, 1237–1248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devito, K.L.; de Souza Barbosa, F.; Felippe Filho, W.N. An artificial multilayer perceptron neural network for diagnosis of proximal dental caries. Oral Surg. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. Oral Radiol. Endodontology 2008, 106, 879–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayrakdar, I.S.; Orhan, K.; Akarsu, S.; Celik, O.; Atasoy, S.; Pekince, A.; Yasa, Y.; Bilgir, E.; Saglam, H.; Aslan, A.F.; et al. Deep-learning approach for caries detection and segmentation on dental bitewing radiographs. Oral. Radiol. 2022, 38, 468–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.; Liu, F.; Yang, W.; Peng, S.; Zhou, J. A Survey of Convolutional Neural Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Prospects. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2022, 33, 6999–7019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casalegno, F.; Newton, T.; Daher, R.; Abdelaziz, M.; Lodi-Rizzini, A.; Schurmann, F.; Krejci, I.; Markram, H. Caries Detection with Near-Infrared Transillumination Using Deep Learning. J. Dent. Res. 2019, 98, 1227–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomez, J. Detection and diagnosis of the early caries lesion. BMC Oral Health 2015, 15 (Suppl. S1), S3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, H.; Li, H.; Zhao, Y.; Zhao, J.; Wang, Y. Dental disease detection on periapical radiographs based on deep convolutional neural networks. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 2021, 16, 649–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hung, M.; Voss, M.W.; Rosales, M.N.; Li, W.; Su, W.; Xu, J.; Bounsanga, J.; Ruiz-Negron, B.; Lauren, E.; Licari, F.W. Application of machine learning for diagnostic prediction of root caries. Gerodontology 2019, 36, 395–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hur, S.H.; Lee, E.Y.; Kim, M.K.; Kim, S.; Kang, J.Y.; Lim, J.S. Machine learning to predict distal caries in mandibular second molars associated with impacted third molars. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 15447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghislieri, M.; Cerone, G.L.; Knaflitz, M.; Agostini, V. Long short-term memory (LSTM) recurrent neural network for muscle activity detection. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 2021, 18, 153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ekert, T.; Krois, J.; Meinhold, L.; Elhennawy, K.; Emara, R.; Golla, T.; Schwendicke, F. Deep Learning for the Radiographic Detection of Apical Lesions. J. Endod. 2019, 45, 917–922.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanella-Calzada, L.A.; Galvan-Tejada, C.E.; Chavez-Lamas, N.M.; Rivas-Gutierrez, J.; Magallanes-Quintanar, R.; Celaya-Padilla, J.M.; Galvan-Tejada, J.I.; Gamboa-Rosales, H. Deep Artificial Neural Networks for the Diagnostic of Caries Using Socioeconomic and Nutritional Features as Determinants: Data from NHANES 2013–2014. Bioengineering 2018, 5, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pethani, F. Promises and perils of artificial intelligence in dentistry. Aust. Dent. J. 2021, 66, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pang, L.; Wang, K.; Tao, Y.; Zhi, Q.; Zhang, J.; Lin, H. A New Model for Caries Risk Prediction in Teenagers Using a Machine Learning Algorithm Based on Environmental and Genetic Factors. Front. Genet. 2021, 12, 636867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guetari, R.; Ayari, H.; Sakly, H. Computer-aided diagnosis systems: A comparative study of classical machine learning versus deep learning-based approaches. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 2023, 65, 3881–3921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qayyum, A.; Tahir, A.; Butt, M.A.; Luke, A.; Abbas, H.T.; Qadir, J.; Arshad, K.; Assaleh, K.; Imran, M.A.; Abbasi, Q.H. Dental caries detection using a semi-supervised learning approach. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aljabri, M.; AlAmir, M.; AlGhamdi, M.; Abdel-Mottaleb, M.; Collado-Mesa, F. Towards a better understanding of annotation tools for medical imaging: A survey. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 81, 25877–25911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Perez de Frutos, J.; Holden Helland, R.; Desai, S.; Nymoen, L.C.; Lango, T.; Remman, T.; Sen, A. AI-Dentify: Deep learning for proximal caries detection on bitewing X-ray—HUNT4 Oral Health Study. BMC Oral Health 2024, 24, 344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.H.; Kim, Y.T.; Lee, J.B. Identification of dental implant systems from low-quality and distorted dental radiographs using AI trained on a large multi-center dataset. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 12606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Howell, M.D.; Corrado, G.S.; DeSalvo, K.B. Three Epochs of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care. JAMA 2024, 331, 242–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammad-Rahimi, H.; Motamedian, S.R.; Rohban, M.H.; Krois, J.; Uribe, S.E.; Mahmoudinia, E.; Rokhshad, R.; Nadimi, M.; Schwendicke, F. Deep learning for caries detection: A systematic review. J. Dent. 2022, 122, 104115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karhade, D.S.; Roach, J.; Shrestha, P.; Simancas-Pallares, M.A.; Ginnis, J.; Burk, Z.J.S.; Ribeiro, A.A.; Cho, H.; Wu, D.; Divaris, K. An Automated Machine Learning Classifier for Early Childhood Caries. Pediatr. Dent. 2021, 43, 191–197. [Google Scholar]
- Duong, D.L.; Kabir, M.H.; Kuo, R.F. Automated caries detection with smartphone color photography using machine learning. Health Inform. J. 2021, 27, 14604582211007530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramos-Gomez, F.; Marcus, M.; Maida, C.A.; Wang, Y.; Kinsler, J.J.; Xiong, D.; Lee, S.Y.; Hays, R.D.; Shen, J.; Crall, J.J.; et al. Using a Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict the Likelihood of Presence of Dental Caries among Children Aged 2 to 7. Dent. J. 2021, 9, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Javed, S.; Zakirulla, M.; Baig, R.U.; Asif, S.M.; Meer, A.B. Development of artificial neural network model for prediction of post-streptococcus mutans in dental caries. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2020, 186, 105198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, T.T.; Xiao, J.; Sohn, M.B.; Fiscella, K.A.; Gilbert, C.; Grier, A.; Gill, A.L.; Gill, S.R. Machine Learning Approach Identified Multi-Platform Factors for Caries Prediction in Child-Mother Dyads. Front. Cell Infect. Microbiol. 2021, 11, 727630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, Y.H.; Kim, S.H.; Choi, Y.Y. Prediction Models of Early Childhood Caries Based on Machine Learning Algorithms. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2021, 18, 8613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Geetha, V.; Aprameya, K.S.; Hinduja, D.M. Dental caries diagnosis in digital radiographs using back-propagation neural network. Health Inf. Sci. Syst. 2020, 8, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oztekin, F.; Katar, O.; Sadak, F.; Yildirim, M.; Cakar, H.; Aydogan, M.; Ozpolat, Z.; Talo Yildirim, T.; Yildirim, O.; Faust, O.; et al. An Explainable Deep Learning Model to Prediction Dental Caries Using Panoramic Radiograph Images. Diagnostics 2023, 13, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Zhang, R.; Wei, X.; Wang, L.; Wu, P.; Yao, Q. Deep learning and sub-band fluorescence imaging-based method for caries and calculus diagnosis embeddable on different smartphones. Biomed. Opt. Express 2023, 14, 866–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, W.M.; Azhari, A.A.; Fawaz, K.A.; Ahmed, H.M.; Alsadah, Z.M.; Majumdar, A.; Carvalho, R.M. Artificial intelligence in the detection and classification of dental caries. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Liang, Y.; Li, W.; Liu, C.; Gu, D.; Sun, W.; Miao, L. Development and evaluation of deep learning for screening dental caries from oral photographs. Oral. Dis. 2022, 28, 173–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lian, L.; Zhu, T.; Zhu, F.; Zhu, H. Deep Learning for Caries Detection and Classification. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moran, M.; Faria, M.; Giraldi, G.; Bastos, L.; Oliveira, L.; Conci, A. Classification of Approximal Caries in Bitewing Radiographs Using Convolutional Neural Networks. Sensors 2021, 21, 5192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Duong, D.L.; Nguyen, Q.D.N.; Tong, M.S.; Vu, M.T.; Lim, J.D.; Kuo, R.F. Proof-of-Concept Study on an Automatic Computational System in Detecting and Classifying Occlusal Caries Lesions from Smartphone Color Images of Unrestored Extracted Teeth. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Askar, H.; Krois, J.; Rohrer, C.; Mertens, S.; Elhennawy, K.; Ottolenghi, L.; Mazur, M.; Paris, S.; Schwendicke, F. Detecting white spot lesions on dental photography using deep learning: A pilot study. J. Dent. 2021, 107, 103615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Devlin, H.; Williams, T.; Graham, J.; Ashley, M. The ADEPT study: A comparative study of dentists’ ability to detect enamel-only proximal caries in bitewing radiographs with and without the use of AssistDent artificial intelligence software. Br. Dent. J. 2021, 231, 481–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaorska, K.; Szczapa, T.; Borysewicz-Lewicka, M.; Nowicki, M.; Gerreth, K. Prediction of Early Childhood Caries Based on Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms Using Neural Networks. Genes 2021, 12, 462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, L.; Wang, H.; Mei, L.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, H. Artificial intelligence in digital cariology: A new tool for the diagnosis of deep caries and pulpitis using convolutional neural networks. Ann. Transl. Med. 2021, 9, 763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vinayahalingam, S.; Kempers, S.; Limon, L.; Deibel, D.; Maal, T.; Hanisch, M.; Berge, S.; Xi, T. Classification of caries in third molars on panoramic radiographs using deep learning. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 12609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Oh, S.I.; Jo, J.; Kang, S.; Shin, Y.; Park, J.W. Deep learning for early dental caries detection in bitewing radiographs. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 16807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mao, Y.C.; Chen, T.Y.; Chou, H.S.; Lin, S.Y.; Liu, S.Y.; Chen, Y.A.; Liu, Y.L.; Chen, C.A.; Huang, Y.C.; Chen, S.L.; et al. Caries and Restoration Detection Using Bitewing Film Based on Transfer Learning with CNNs. Sensors 2021, 21, 4613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Y.-P.; Lee, S.-Y. Deep Learning for Caries Detection using Optical Coherence Tomography. medRxiv 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schwendicke, F.; Elhennawy, K.; Paris, S.; Friebertshauser, P.; Krois, J. Deep learning for caries lesion detection in near-infrared light transillumination images: A pilot study. J. Dent. 2020, 92, 103260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Choi, J.; Eun, H.; Kim, C. Boosting Proximal Dental Caries Detection via Combination of Variational Methods and Convolutional Neural Network. J. Signal Process. Syst. 2016, 90, 87–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Imangaliyev, S.; Van Der Veen, M.H.; Volgenant, C.M.C.; Keijser, B.J.F.; Crielaard, W.; Levin, E. Deep Learning for Classification of Dental Plaque Images. In Machine Learning, Optimization, and Big Data: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop, MOD 2016, Volterra, Italy, 26–29 August 2016; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 407–410. [Google Scholar]
- Dayi, B.; Uzen, H.; Cicek, I.B.; Duman, S.B. A Novel Deep Learning-Based Approach for Segmentation of Different Type Caries Lesions on Panoramic Radiographs. Diagnostics 2023, 13, 202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrawal, P.; Nikhade, P. Artificial Intelligence in Dentistry: Past, Present, and Future. Cureus 2022, 14, e27405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khanagar, S.B.; Alfouzan, K.; Awawdeh, M.; Alkadi, L.; Albalawi, F.; Alfadley, A. Application and Performance of Artificial Intelligence Technology in Detection, Diagnosis and Prediction of Dental Caries (DC)—A Systematic Review. Diagnostics 2022, 12, 1083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anil, S.; Porwal, P.; Porwal, A. Transforming Dental Caries Diagnosis Through Artificial Intelligence-Based Techniques. Cureus 2023, 15, e41694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petersson, L.; Larsson, I.; Nygren, J.M.; Nilsen, P.; Neher, M.; Reed, J.E.; Tyskbo, D.; Svedberg, P. Challenges to implementing artificial intelligence in healthcare: A qualitative interview study with healthcare leaders in Sweden. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2022, 22, 850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Study | AI Algorithm | Objective | Modality | Sample | Accuracy/Evaluation/Statistical Significance | Key Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Karhade et al., 2021 [41] | ANN | Classification for Early Childhood Caries (ECCs) through an automated ML algorithm | Datasets | 6040 (5123 for training and 1281 for testing) | 0.74 AUC, 0.67 sensitivity and 0.64 PPV. | Results compared with 10 clinical examiners. The ML model had similar performance to that of the reference model. |
Duong et al., 2021 [42] | ANN | Automated ML algorithm for the detection of dental caries through smartphone photographs | Photos using a smartphone | 620 teeth (validating, 80% and testing, 20%) | 92.37% accuracy, 88.1% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity | The results were compared with four trained and calibrated dentists. The model showed great potential for clinical diagnostics with considerable accuracy at minimal expense. Further improvement and verification are required for vector machine support. |
Ramos-Gomez et al., 2021 [43] | ANN | ML algorithm for the identification of survey items that predict dental caries (random forest) | Datasets | 182 subjects | For caries parent’s age classification (MDG of 0.84; MDA of 1.97), unmet needs (MDG of 0.71; MDA of 2.06). Caries parent’s age prediction (MDG of 2.97; MDA of 4.74), with oral health complications in last 1 year (MDG of 2.20; MDA of 4.04) | The results were compared with two trained dentists. The model demonstrated potential for dental caries screening among children. |
Javed et al., 2020 [44] | ANN | Predicting post-Streptococcus mutans prior to the excavation of dental caries based on pre-Streptococcus mutans using an iOS App | Datasets | 45 patients | Predicts post-Streptococcus mutans with an efficiency of 0.99033, mean squared error and mean absolute percentage error for testing cases were 0.2341 and 4.967 respectively | A logistic regression model was used. The model efficiently generalized the non-linear relationship between pre- and post-Streptococcus mutans for three different caries excavations. Clinicians can take advantage of the model to efficiently predict post-Streptococcus mutans with the aid of the developed PSm iOS App without needing an internet connection. |
Pang et al., 2021 [33] | ANN | Predicting the risk of caries based on environmental and genetic factors (AI-based ML model) | Datasets | 953 patients; 633 for training and 320 for testing | 0.73 AUC | A logistic regression model was used. The AI model accurately identified patients of a high and very high risk of dental caries. A powerful technique for the identification of patients at a high risk of dental caries at the community level. |
Hur et al., 2021 [28] | ANN | Predicting dental caries on 2nd molars associated with affected 3rd molars in panoramic radiographs and CBCT | CBCT images and panoramic radiographs | 1321 patients (2642 impacted mandibular 3rd molars; 1850 for training and 792 for testing) | 0.88 to 0.89 ROC | The results were compared with a reference standard (single predictors). The model performed significantly better at predicting dental caries than other models. The model could be of great help to clinicians for decision making and preventive treatment on 3rd molars. |
De Araujo et al., 2021 [19] | ANN | Predicting and detecting radiation-related caries (RRCs) on panoramic radiographs (AI-based model) | Digital panoramic radiographs | 15 head and neck cancer patients | Detection, 98.8% accuracy and 0.9869 AUC; prediction, 99.2% accuracy and 0.9886 AUC | The results were compared with two expert dentists. The model demonstrated high detection and diagnostic accuracy for RRCs. The models could help in designing HNC patients’ preventive dental care. |
Wu et al., 2021 [45] | ANN | Identification of oral microbes (caries-related) in cross-sectional mother–child dyads | Datasets | For children dental caries prediction models: 36 plaque and 37 salivary samples. For mother dental caries prediction models: 32 plaque samples | AUCs of 0.78, 0.82, and 0.73, respectively, for the child’s plaque model, for the child’s saliva model, and for the mother’s plaque model | The results were compared with the reference standard. The models attained desirable outcomes for both children and mothers. To fine tune these models in the future, more variables should be considered. |
Park et al., 2021 [46] | ANN | Prediction of early childhood caries using ML-based artificial intelligence models (Final model, LightGBM algorithms, random forest, and XGBoost) | Datasets | 4195 (2936 for training and 1259 for testing) | AUC of 0.774–0.785 | A traditional regression model was used. The AI models demonstrated favorable performance in the prediction of dental caries. The model could be utilized in the identification of a high-risk group and the implementation of preventive treatments. |
Geetha et al., 2020 [47] | ANN | Diagnosing dental caries in digital radiographs | Digital radiographs (intraoral digital images) | 145 intraoral digital images | 97.1% accuracy, a 2.8% false-positive rate, a 0.987 ROC area, and a 0.987 PRC area | The results were compared with an expert dentist. The back-propagation neural network model predicted dental caries more accurately than traditional methods. Datasets of high quality and quantity and improved algorithms may exhibit better outcomes in dental practice. |
Hung et al., 2019 [27] | ANN | ML model for diagnosing and predicting root caries | Datasets | 7272 training cases and 1818 testing cases | 97.1% accuracy, 95.1% precision, 99.6% sensitivity, 94.3% specificity, and 0.997 AUC | Reference models and professional dentists served as comparators. The model had the best performance. It could be implemented for clinical diagnosis and could used by both dental and non-dental professionals. It is based on |
Zanella-Calzada et al., 2018 [31] | ANN | Analyzing the demographic and dietary factors determining dental caries and oral health | Datasets | 6868 training cases and 2944 testing cases | 0.69 accuracy and 0.69 and 0.75 AUC values | National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data. High accuracy in diagnosis of caries based on demographic and dietary and variables. This model could be helpful to dentists through the provision of an easy, fast, and free dental caries diagnosis tool. |
Devito et al., 2008 [20] | ANN | Diagnosis of proximal DC using an AI-based model | Bitewing radiographs | 160 radiographs | 0.884 AUC | The results were compared with 25 examiners. This model improved the performance on proximal caries diagnosis. When all examiners were considered, the use of neural networks improved the diagnosis rate by 39.4%. |
Oztekin et al., 2023 [48] | CNN | Detecting dental caries using three explainable deep learning models: EfficientNet-B0, DenseNet-121, and ResNet-50 | Panoramic radiographs | 562 subjects | 92% accuracy, 87.33% sensitivity, and a 91.61% F1 score | The results were compared with experienced dentists. All the three models similarly identified DC with high accuracy and reliability. However, the ResNet-50 model produced slightly better performance in comparison to the other two. The heat maps could be used by dentists to reduce miscalculations and to validate the classification of the results. |
Wang et al., 2023 [49] | CNN | Automatic dental caries and calculus diagnosis using fluorescence sub-band imaging together with deep learning models | Datasets | For training, 54; for validating, 8; and for testing, 16 | Means: 96.82% accuracy, 96.56% sensitivity, 99.22% specificity, and a 96.57% F1 score | The results were compared with reference models. The model performed competitively in comparison to the existing methods. This low-cost, highly accurate, and portable method could potentially be used for caries detection both at home and in the community. |
Ahmed et al., 2023 [50] | CNN | Evaluating the effectiveness of automated AI models in identifying and classifying dental caries based on the King Abdulaziz University (KAU)-modified (ICDAS) system from dental bitewings | Bitewing radiographs with a 1876 × 1402 pixel resolution | 554 bitewing radiographs for testing | 0.55 model mean score and 0.535 mean F1 score for proximal carious lesions, while the segmentation model showed 0.76 sensitivity, 0.87 precision, and a 0.81 F1 score | The results were compared with two experienced dentists. The model outperformed the two experienced dentists in identifying and classifying dental caries. This study validated the potential for developing an accurate caries detection model to expedite the identification of caries, enhancing the decision making of clinicians and improving patients’ quality of care. |
Bayrakdar et al., 2022 [21] | CNN | Automated detection and segmentation of caries on bitewing radiographs using DL models (VGG-16 and U-Net) | Digital bitewing radiographs | 2325 images on 621 patients (2072 for training, 200 for validating, and 53 for testing) | For the detection of caries, 0.84 sensitivity, 0.81 precision, and 0.84 F-measure rates; for caries segmentation, 0.86 sensitivity, 0.84 precision, and 0.84 F-measure rates | The results were compared with five experts and experienced observers. The models not only accurately detected dental caries but were also beneficial in their segmentation. The models could be helpful in the clinical decision making of clinicians, since they demonstrated superior performance to that of specialists. |
Zhang et al., 2022 [51] | CNN | Assessing the performance of ConvNet (a CNN-based model) for detecting dental caries by oral photographs | Oral photographs | 3932 photographs (training, 2507; testing, 1125) of 625 subjects | 85.65% AUC and 81.90% sensitivity | The results were compared with three certified dentists. The model demonstrated promising outcomes for the detection of dental caries in oral photographs. It is a cost-effective technique for dental caries screening. |
Kühnisch et al., 2022 [18] | CNN | Evaluating dental caries detection and categorization of a CNN-based model using oral photographs | Oral photographs | 2417 photographs (training, 1891; testing, 479) | 92.5% accuracy, 89.6% sensitivity, 94.3% specificity, and 0.64 AUC | The results were compared with a reference model. The model showed considerable accuracy in dental caries detecting using intraoral photographs. The model could potentially be useful in the future. |
Lian et al., 2021 [52] | CNN | Identification of caries lesions and categorizing radiographic extensions on panoramic films according to depth (dentin lesions in the outer, middle, or inner third D1/2/3 of the dentin) | Panoramic radiographs | Not stated | 0.785 intersection over union (IoU), 0.663 Dice coefficient value, 0.986 accuracy, and 0.821 recall rate | The results were compared with six experienced dentists. Both neural networks and experienced dentists produced the same outcomes. The models ought to be explored for the diagnosis of diseases and planning for treatment. |
Moran et al., 2021 [53] | CNN | Evaluating the effectiveness of deep CNN algorithms for detecting and diagnosing dental caries | Periapical radiographs | 480 images of teeth | 73.3% accuracy | The results were compared with less-experienced dentists. No statistically significant difference between less-experienced dentists and the CNN algorithm was found. This model could help physicians make more accurate dental caries diagnoses. |
Duong et al., 2021 [54] | CNN | Detecting and classifying dental caries through smartphone photographs | Photos using a smartphone | 587 extracted teeth (for training, 80%; for validating, 10%; and for testing, 10%) | 87.39% accuracy, 89.88% sensitivity, and 68.86% specificity | The results were compared with trained dentists. The model showed good accuracy in detecting dental caries. It’s GoogleNet performance was better than those of ResNet18 and ResNet50. Training of the model ought to be performed with both in vivo and vitro images. There is need for the development of a good imaging method for occlusal surfaces. |
Askar et al., 2021 [55] | CNN | Detection of white spot lesions by digital camera photographs (DL model) | Digital camera images | 2781 labelled teeth of 51 patients | For the detection of any lesions (PPV/NPV), between 0.77 and 0.80; for the detection of fluorotic lesions, 0.67 PPV–0.86 NPV; and for the detection of non-fluorotic lesions, 0.46 PPV–0.93 NPV | The results were compared with a trained dentist. The model demonstrated sufficient accuracy in the detection of white spot lesions, especially fluorosis. For generalizability, there is a need of more datasets. |
Chen et al., 2021 [25] | CNN | Dental disease detection on periapical radiographs (DL model) | Digital periapical radiographs | 2900 periapical radiographs | Detection of lesions was performed with precision and recalls of 0.5–0.6 at all levels | The results were compared with a trained expert and a reference model. The models could detect dental caries through periapical radiographs. The utilization of these models for lesion detection is best at severe levels. Therefore, there is a need for more training at various levels. |
Devlin et al., 2021 [56] | CNN | Detecting dental caries (enamel-only proximal) on bitewing radiographs using AssistDent AI software | Bitewing radiographs | 24 patients | In comparison to expert dentists, a high diagnosis accuracy with 71% sensitivity and an 11% decrease in specificity, which were statistically significant (p < 0.01) | The results were compared with six dental specialists (for grading) and 23 dentists. The model improved the dentists’ ability to detect dental caries (enamel-only proximal) significantly. It could be utilized by dentists as a supportive tool in preventive dentistry practice. |
Zaorska et al., 2021 [57] | CNN | Predicting dental caries based on selected polymorphisms using an AI model | Datasets | 95 patients | 93% overall accuracy (p < 0.0001), 90.9–98.4% prediction accuracy, 90% sensitivity, 96% specificity, and 0.97 AUC (p < 0.0001) | A logistic regression model used. The AI model showed high accuracy in dental caries prediction. The knowledge of the status of potential risks can be useful in designing practices of oral hygiene and recommendations of dietary habits for patients. |
Zheng et al., 2021 [58] | CNN | Evaluating and comparing 3 CNN models (VGG19, Inception V3, and ResNet18) for deep dental caries diagnosis | Radiographs | 844 radiographs (717 for training and 127 for testing) | 0.82 accuracy, 0.81 precision, 0.85 sensitivity, 0.82 specificity, and 0.89 AUC | The results were compared with experienced dentists, VGG19, and Inception V3. Among the three CNN models, ResNet18 displayed good performance. With regards to clinical parameters, the model showed an enhanced performance. |
Mertens S et al., 2021 [16] | CNN | Detecting proximal dental caries using bitewing radiographs | Bitewing radiographs | 140 (20 for testing) patients | 0.89 ROC and 0.81 sensitivity (p < 0.05) | The results were compared with expert dentists. Dentists who used an AI model showed a significantly better performance than those who did not. Dentist diagnostic accuracy could be enhanced through this model. |
Vinayahalingam et al., 2021 [59] | CNN | Evaluating MobileNet V2 used for the classification of dental caries on panoramic radiographs | Panoramic radiographs | 500 radiographs (320 for training, 80 for validating, and 100 for testing) | 0.87 accuracy, 0.86 sensitivity, 0.88 specificity, 0.90 AUC, and 0.86 F1 score | The results were compared with a reference standard. The model showed good performance in dental caries detection in 3rd molars. The model could initiate the development of a model that would help clinicians in making the decision of removing 3rd molars. |
Lee et al., 2021 [60] | CNN | Evaluating U-Net (deep CNN) models for detecting dental caries on bitewing radiographs | Bitewing radiographs | 304 for training and 50 for testing | 63.29% precision, 65.02% recall, and 64.14% F1 score | The results were compared with three expert dentists. The model demonstrated sufficient performance in dental caries detection. Through this model, clinicians could detect dental caries more accurately. |
Mao et al., 2021 [61] | CNN | Identifying dental caries and restorations in bitewing radiographs | Bitewing radiographs | 278 images (70% for training and 30% for testing) | 95.56% accuracy for restoration judgment and 90.3% accuracy for dental caries judgment | The results were compared with reference models (GoogleNet, Vgg19, and ResNet50). The AlexNet model displayed high accuracy than other models. Through this model, dentists would be able to make better decisions and treatment plans. |
Huang et al., 2021 [62] | CNN | Detecting dental caries using AI models: AlexNet, ResNet-152, ResNext-101, VGG-16, and Xception | Micro-CT and OCT images | 748 2D cross-sectional images (599, training; 149, testing) | ResNet-152 showed the highest rates of accuracy (95.21%), sensitivity (98.85%), and specificity (89.83%) with 93.48% PPV and 98.15% NPV values | The results were compared with five clinicians. The ResNet-152 CNN models distinguished pathological tooth structures better than clinicians. These models would help clinicians to provide more accurate diagnoses for patients. |
Cantu et al., 2020 [17] | CNN | Identifying carious lesions | Bitewing radiographs | 3293 for training and 252 for testing | 0.80 accuracy, 0.75 sensitivity, and 0.80 specificity | The results were compared with four experienced individual dentists. The trained neural network had higher precision (0.80 vs. 0.71), specificity (0.83 vs. 0.9) and sensitivity (0.75 vs. 0.36) values than individual dentists. The model can assist dentists, more so in detecting initial caries lesions. |
Schwendicke et al., 2020 [63] | CNN | Detection of dental caries in near-infrared-light transillumination (NILT) images | NILT images | 226 images of extracted teeth | 0.74 mean AUC, 0.59 sensitivity, 0.76 specificity, 0.63 PP, and 0.73 NPV | The results were compared with two expert dentists. The models detected dental caries satisfactorily. They would be relevant in environments such as care homes, rural outpost centers, and schools. |
Casalegno et al., 2019 [23] | CNN | Automatically detecting and localizing dental caries in NILT images | NILT images | 217 grayscale images and 185 for training | 72.7% mean IOU score on a 5-class segmentation task, 49.5% and 49.0% IOU scores, and 83.6% and 85.6% ROC curves for proximal and occlusal carious lesions, respectively | The results were compared with experts and a reference deep neural network model. The DL approach increased the accuracy and speed of caries detection. The model could support dentists through the provision of high-throughput diagnostic help and the improvement of patient outcomes. |
Ekert et al., 2019 [30] | CNN | AI system for detecting apical lesions | Panoramic radiographs (OPGs) | 2001 panoramic radiographs | 0.85 AUC, 0.65 sensitivity, and 0.8 specificity | The results were compared with six dentists. The model was effective in finding apical lesions in panoramic dental radiographs. It can assist dentists in detecting apical lesions more accurately in panoramic dental radiographs. |
Choi et al., 2018 [64] | CNN | Detecting proximal dental caries | Periapical radiographs | 475 periapical radiographs | 0.74 F1max with 0.88 false positives | The results were compared with experienced dentists and a naïve CNN method as a reference model. The model proved superior to the naïve CNN model. Proximal dental caries were successfully detected by this model. |
Imangaliyev et al., 2016 [65] | CNN | Automated classification model (CNN model) for red fluorescent dental plaque images | Quantitative light-induced fluorescence images | 427 images | F1 score of 0.75 ± 0.05 on the test dataset | The results were compared with reference models. The model had higher prediction accuracy than the other models. The model benefitted directly from the images‘ multi-channel representation, hence improving the performance when the three color channels were utilized. |
Dayi et al., 2023 [66] | DCDN | Evaluating the performance (diagnostic) of an AI system based on deep learning (Dental Caries Detection Network) for the segmentation of occlusal, cervical, and proximal caries lesions using panoramic radiographs | Panoramic radiographs | 504 anonymous panoramic radiographs (75% for training and 25% for testing) | 62.79% average F1 score and 15.69% highest average F1 score in state-of-the-art segmentation models | The results were compared with reference models. The system detected occlusal and proximal caries successfully but demonstrated weak performance in the detection of cervical caries. These systems could become common in dental clinics, as they increase the success rate in diagnosis and treatment, while also assisting dentists. |
Lee et al., 2018 [26] | DCNN | Identifying dental caries in periapical radiographs | Periapical radiographs | 2400 photos for training and validation and 600 for testing | 82% diagnostic accuracy for both models, 88% for molars, and 89% for premolars | Dental caries were successfully detected. This model is potentially useful for detecting and diagnosing dental caries. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Al-Khalifa, K.S.; Ahmed, W.M.; Azhari, A.A.; Qaw, M.; Alsheikh, R.; Alqudaihi, F.; Alfaraj, A. The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Caries Detection: A Review. Bioengineering 2024, 11, 936. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11090936
Al-Khalifa KS, Ahmed WM, Azhari AA, Qaw M, Alsheikh R, Alqudaihi F, Alfaraj A. The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Caries Detection: A Review. Bioengineering. 2024; 11(9):936. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11090936
Chicago/Turabian StyleAl-Khalifa, Khalifa S., Walaa Magdy Ahmed, Amr Ahmed Azhari, Masoumah Qaw, Rasha Alsheikh, Fatema Alqudaihi, and Amal Alfaraj. 2024. "The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Caries Detection: A Review" Bioengineering 11, no. 9: 936. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11090936
APA StyleAl-Khalifa, K. S., Ahmed, W. M., Azhari, A. A., Qaw, M., Alsheikh, R., Alqudaihi, F., & Alfaraj, A. (2024). The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Caries Detection: A Review. Bioengineering, 11(9), 936. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11090936