Does artificial intelligence predict orthognathic surgical outcomes better than conventional linear regression methods?

Orthodontic treatment outcome predictive performance differences between artificial intelligence and conventional methods

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate an artificial intelligence (AI) model in predicting soft tissue and alveolar bone changes following orthodontic treatment and compare the predictive performance of the AI model with conventional prediction models.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1774 lateral cephalograms of 887 adult patients who had undergone orthodontic treatment were collected. Patients who had orthognathic surgery were excluded. On each cephalogram, 78 landmarks were detected using PIPNet-based AI. Prediction models consisted of 132 predictor variables and 88 outcome variables. Predictor variables were demographics (age, sex), clinical (treatment time, premolar extraction), and Cartesian coordinates of the 64 anatomic landmarks. Outcome variables were Cartesian coordinates of the 22 soft tissue and 22 hard tissue landmarks after orthodontic treatment. The AI prediction model was based on the TabNet deep neural network. Two conventional statistical methods, multivariate multiple linear regression (MMLR) and partial least squares regression (PLSR), were each implemented for comparison. Prediction accuracy among the methods was compared.

RESULTS

Overall, MMLR demonstrated the most accurate results, while AI was least accurate. AI showed superior predictions in only 5 of the 44 anatomic landmarks, all of which were soft tissue landmarks inferior to menton to the terminal point of the neck.

CONCLUSIONS

When predicting changes following orthodontic treatment, AI was not as effective as conventional statistical methods. However, AI had an outstanding advantage in predicting soft tissue landmarks with substantial variability. Overall, results may indicate the need for a hybrid prediction model that combines conventional and AI methods.

Factors influencing the development of artificial intelligence in orthodontics

OBJECTIVES

Since developing AI procedures demands significant computing resources and time, the implementation of a careful experimental design is essential. The purpose of this study was to investigate factors influencing the development of AI in orthodontics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 162 AI models were developed, with various combinations of sample sizes (170, 340, 679), input variables (40, 80, 160), output variables (38, 76, 154), training sessions (100, 500, 1000), and computer specifications (new vs. old). The TabNet deep-learning algorithm was used to develop these AI models, and leave-one-out cross-validation was applied in training. The goodness-of-fit of the regression models was compared using the adjusted coefficient of determination values, and the best-fit model was selected accordingly. Multiple linear regression analyses were employed to investigate the relationship between the influencing factors.

RESULTS

Increasing the number of training sessions enhanced the effectiveness of the AI models. The best-fit regression model for predicting the computational time of AI, which included logarithmic transformation of time, sample size, and training session variables, demonstrated an adjusted coefficient of determination of 0.99.

CONCLUSION

The study results show that estimating the time required for AI development may be possible using logarithmic transformations of time, sample size, and training session variables, followed by applying coefficients estimated through several pilot studies with reduced sample sizes and reduced training sessions.