Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025
Dynamic Navigation for Dental Implant Placement
Published on: September 13, 2022
Novel AI-based automated virtual implant placement: Artificial versus human intelligence.
Bahaaeldeen M Elgarba1, Rocharles Cavalcante Fontenele2, Francesco Mangano3
1OMFS-IMPATH Research Group, Department of Imaging and Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven & Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospitals, Campus Sint-Rafael, Leuven 3000, Belgium; Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University, Tanta 31511, Egypt.
A new artificial intelligence (AI) tool for dental implant planning offers expert-level quality and clinical acceptance. This AI approach is significantly faster and more consistent than traditional human intelligence (HI) planning methods.
Area of Science:
- Dentistry
- Artificial Intelligence
- Surgical Planning
Background:
- Presurgical implant planning is often complex and time-consuming, requiring collaboration among specialists.
- The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) offers a potential solution to streamline this process.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the quality, clinical acceptance, time efficiency, and consistency of a novel AI-driven tool for single-tooth replacement implant planning.
- To compare the AI tool's performance against a human intelligence (HI)-based planning approach.
Main Methods:
- A dataset of 10 cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and intra-oral scans (IOS) was used for single mandibular molar/premolar implant placement.
- AI-driven planning was compared to expert human planning, with evaluations by 12 calibrated dentists using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and a Turing test.
- Time efficiency and consistency (median surface deviation) were measured for both AI and HI methods.
Main Results:
- Both AI and HI planning required minimal clinically relevant corrections (95% and 96%, respectively).
- AI planning was over twice as fast as HI planning (198 ± 33 s vs. 435 ± 92 s).
- AI demonstrated superior consistency with a median surface deviation of 0.3 ± 0.17 mm compared to HI.
Conclusions:
- The AI tool provides expert-quality, clinically acceptable implant planning.
- The AI approach is significantly more time-efficient and consistent than human-based planning.
