Reliability and accuracy of Artificial intelligence-based software for cephalometric diagnosis. A diagnostic study.

BACKGROUND

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing cephalometric diagnosis in orthodontics, streamlining the patient assessments. This study aimed to assess the reliability, accuracy, and time consumption of artificial intelligence (AI)-based software compared to a conventional digital cephalometric analysis method on 2D lateral cephalogram.

METHODS

408 lateral cephalometries were analysed using three methods: manual landmark localization, automatic localization, and semi-automatic localization with AI-based software. On each lateral cephalogram, 15 variables were selected, including skeletal, dental, and soft tissue measurements. The difference between the two AI-based software options (automatic and semi-automatic) was compared with the conventional digital technique. The time required to produce a complete cephalometric tracing was evaluated for each method using Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences in the accuracy of landmark positioning were detected among the three different techniques (p < 0,01). However, it is noteworthy that almost all of these differences were not clinically significant. There was a small difference in accuracy between the semi-automatic AI-based option and conventional digital techniques. Regarding the time used for each technique, the automatic version was the fastest, followed by the semi-automatic option and the conventional digital technique. (p < 0,000).

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed a statistical difference in accuracy between the conventional digital technique and two AI-based software alternatives, but these differences were not clinically significant except for specific measurements. The semi-automatic option was more accurate than the automatic one and faster than conventional tracing. Further research is needed to confirm AI's accuracy in cephalometric tracing.