Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 7, 2026

Reliability of Artificial Intelligence-Based Cone Beam Computed Tomography Integration with Digital Dental Images
Published on: February 23, 2024
Novel marker-based cone-beam CT registration for enhanced accuracy in dental implant planning
Maryam Buholayka1, Rama Zouabi2, Santiago F Cobos3
1Department of Biomedical Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, 34212, Saudi Arabia.
Objectives:
Accurate image registration is essential for successful digital dental implant planning. Surface-based registration, commonly used in clinical software, is sensitive to cone-beam CT (CBCT) artifacts and relies on manual landmark selection, potentially reducing accuracy. Marker-based registration offers improved precision but is underused due to its technical complexity and time demands. The purpose of this ex-vivo study was to evaluate the accuracy of a novel marker-based registration method using limited-view CBCT reconstructions derived from 2 orthogonal projection images and to compare it with a conventional surface-based registration method.
Methods:
An ex-vivo model consisting of a maxillary arch with removable 3D-printed teeth and a radiographic guide containing radiographic markers was used to simulate 5 metal artifact conditions. Full-view CBCT scans were acquired for each condition. For the conventional method, 3 examiners independently performed dual-scan registrations using user-defined surface landmarks on full CBCT reconstructions. For the proposed method, examiners selected orthogonal projection images where markers were clearly visible and limited-view reconstructions were generated to identify marker centroids. Registration error was measured as the point-to-point distance between corresponding surface reference points, standardized to a common frame of reference. Inter-rater reliability was also assessed.
Results:
Both methods maintained consistent performance across all artifact conditions. The proposed method demonstrated greater accuracy, with lower point-to-point registration errors and less spatial variation. Inter-rater reliability was excellent for the proposed method and good for the conventional approach.
Conclusion:
The proposed marker-based registration method using orthogonal projection images and limited-view CBCT reconstructions showed higher accuracy than conventional surface-based registration under controlled ex-vivo conditions. Although the workflow currently requires additional examiner input, it may improve precision in dual-scan protocols for implant planning. Future clinical studies and software developments are required to support clinical implementation.
