Accuracy of Remote Examination for Detecting Potentially Malignant Oral Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

We aimed to investigate the accuracy of remote examination by photographs compared to in-person clinical examination for detecting potentially malignant oral lesions (PMOLs). The Reporting Guide and Guidelines for Writing Systematic Reviews (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis [PRISMA]) guided the reporting of findings. The search was conducted by two independent reviewers in six databases with no language restriction until November 2022. The Population, Test-Index, Reference Standard, Outcome and Study Design (PIROS) strategy guided the eligibility criteria, and studies with adult patients (P) examined remotely (I) and in-person (R) to verify the detection of PMOLs (O) were considered. The methodological quality was assessed by QUADAS-2, and the certainty of the evidence was measured by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). A total of 769 files were identified. After removing duplicates and reading titles and abstracts, 16 were read in full, from which 6 articles then comprised the qualitative synthesis. The oral clinical examination was the reference standard in four studies. Five studies presented high risk of bias in at least one assessment domain. A high probability of detection of PMOL by remote examination (97.37%) was observed for the three studies included in the meta-analysis, which presented high heterogeneity among them. The certainty of evidence for the outcome was considered very low. Remote tools for detecting PMOLs may be feasible and assertive, but new studies are required to incorporate them into clinical practice. Remote examination for the detection of PMOLs has the potential to favoring the early diagnosis of malignant lesions.