애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문의료경영학연구2020.09 발행KCI 피인용 2

딥러닝 기반 치과 의료영상 판독에 대한 문헌 분석

Literature Analysis of Deep Learning Based Dental Imaging Readings

최현철(경희대학교 일반대학원 의료경영학과); 김초명(순천향대학교 ICT융합연구센터); 박상찬(경희대학교)

14권 3호, 15~28쪽

초록

This study analyzes the papers, which studied to find the most adequate CNN based algorithms for segmentation, object detection in dentistry. According to our purpose, we created several keywords like “Dental+Object Detection+Neural+Network.” We searched articles in ‘PubMed’, ‘IEEE’, using created 34 keywords. We found 458 papers and excluded under a study-purpose provision. So This paper had categorized those 23 papers by 11 of segmentation of tooth structure with dental filling and FDI numbering, 12 of detecting dental caries, periodontitis, or multiple lesions. To compare the performance of models, we organized the results by DICE/IoU index and accuracy, precision, recall, etc.. Various dataset was used for analyzing. The most common dataset was dental panoramic image, then periapical, CBCT, NILT, and intra-oral image. The algorithms were used according to the purpose. For example, VGG16, 19 was used for object detection algorithms were used according to the purpose. For example, VGG16, 19 was used for object detection, U-Net, and Mask R-CNN used for segmentation by study purpose. For segmentation of teeth, Zhimming Cui(2019), used Mask R-CNN, and the accuracy was 0.9755. Vranck(2020) used ResNet for molar detection(IoU 0.9, precision 0.94, 0.93). To label the tooth numbering according to FDI rule, Tuzoff(2019) and Chen(2019), used Faster R-CNN, VGG16, and Faster R-CNN with DNN. Tuzoff’s index was slightly better than Chen’s. Casalegno(2019) investigated the detection of dental caries by using VGG16. The result was IoU 0.727. To find periodontitis, used VGG16 also, by Prajapaty(2017). And the accuracy was 0.8846. Using the Mask R-CNN, Jader(2018) could separate instances of multiple lesions, accuracy was 0.8846.

Abstract

This study analyzes the papers, which studied to find the most adequate CNN based algorithms for segmentation, object detection in dentistry. According to our purpose, we created several keywords like “Dental+Object Detection+Neural+Network.” We searched articles in ‘PubMed’, ‘IEEE’, using created 34 keywords. We found 458 papers and excluded under a study-purpose provision. So This paper had categorized those 23 papers by 11 of segmentation of tooth structure with dental filling and FDI numbering, 12 of detecting dental caries, periodontitis, or multiple lesions. To compare the performance of models, we organized the results by DICE/IoU index and accuracy, precision, recall, etc.. Various dataset was used for analyzing. The most common dataset was dental panoramic image, then periapical, CBCT, NILT, and intra-oral image. The algorithms were used according to the purpose. For example, VGG16, 19 was used for object detection algorithms were used according to the purpose. For example, VGG16, 19 was used for object detection, U-Net, and Mask R-CNN used for segmentation by study purpose. For segmentation of teeth, Zhimming Cui(2019), used Mask R-CNN, and the accuracy was 0.9755. Vranck(2020) used ResNet for molar detection(IoU 0.9, precision 0.94, 0.93). To label the tooth numbering according to FDI rule, Tuzoff(2019) and Chen(2019), used Faster R-CNN, VGG16, and Faster R-CNN with DNN. Tuzoff’s index was slightly better than Chen’s. Casalegno(2019) investigated the detection of dental caries by using VGG16. The result was IoU 0.727. To find periodontitis, used VGG16 also, by Prajapaty(2017). And the accuracy was 0.8846. Using the Mask R-CNN, Jader(2018) could separate instances of multiple lesions, accuracy was 0.8846.

발행기관:
경영연구원
DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.18014/hsmr.2020.14.3.15
분류:
의료경영

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
딥러닝 기반 치과 의료영상 판독에 대한 문헌 분석 | 의료경영학연구 2020 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI