Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 1137
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2023  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 27

The application of artificial neural networks in the detection of mandibular fractures using panoramic radiography

1 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Aja University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Maryam Shahnavazi
School of Dentistry, Aja University of Medical Sciences, Misaq Complex, 13th East Street, Ajoudanieh, Tehran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.369629

Rights and Permissions

Background: Panoramic radiography is a standard diagnostic imaging method for dentists. However, it is challenging to detect mandibular trauma and fractures in panoramic radiographs due to the superimposed facial skeleton structures. The objective of this study was to develop a deep learning algorithm that is capable of detecting mandibular fractures and trauma automatically and compare its performance with general dentists. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective diagnostic test accuracy study. This study used a two-stage deep learning framework. To train the model, 190 panoramic images were collected from four different sources. The mandible was first segmented using a U-net model. Then, to detect fractures, a model named Faster region-based convolutional neural network was applied. In the end, a comparison was made between the accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of artificial intelligence and general dentists in trauma diagnosis. Results: The mAP50 and mAP75 for object detection were 98.66% and 57.90%, respectively. The classification accuracy of the model was 91.67%. The sensitivity and specificity of the model were 100% and 83.33%, respectively. On the other hand, human-level diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 87.22 ± 8.91, 82.22 ± 16.39, and 92.22 ± 6.33, respectively. Conclusion: Our framework can provide a level of performance better than general dentists when it comes to diagnosing trauma or fractures.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded101    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal