Artificial Intelligence-Supported and App-Aided Cephalometric Analysis: Which One Can We Trust?

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the reproducibility and reliability of the AI-supported WebCeph and app-aided OneCeph cephalometric analysis programs with a manual analysis method and to evaluate the analysis times. Methods: The study material consisted of pretreatment lateral cephalograms from 110 cases. Cephalometric analyses were performed manually, using the WebCeph program, and using the OneCeph application. A total of 11 skeletal, 6 dental, and 3 soft tissue parameters were measured. Cephalometric analyses of 30 randomly selected cases were performed again using three methods. The analysis times were recorded. Results: The WebCeph program and OneCeph application are highly compatible with the manual analysis method in terms of all parameters, except for SN measurement. It was found that the WebCeph program and the OneCeph application demonstrated moderate agreement in U1-NA distance measurement, while statistically high agreement was observed among all three methods for other dental parameters. It was determined that there was a moderate agreement among the methods in terms of nasolabial angle, whereas a statistically high level of agreement was found for the other soft tissue parameters. The analysis time was found to be the lowest in the WebCeph program and the highest in the manual analysis method. Conclusions: The WebCeph program and OneCeph application showed a high degree of compatibility with the manual analysis method, except for SN, SNA, Gonial angle, Articular angle, U1-NA distance and nasolabial angle measurements. Due to the higher correlation between OneCeph and the manual method, it can be concluded that the OneCeph application is the best alternative to the manual method.