Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

AI shows high accuracy for 3D upper airway segmentation in CBCT/CT scans versus manual methodsAI shows promise for analyzing airway scans, but more research is needed

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider AI as a potential assistive tool for upper airway segmentation, but recognize more evidence is needed.

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including deep learning and machine learning, for 3D segmentation of the upper airway in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) or CT scans. The analysis included 11 studies, with 6 contributing to meta-analyses, comparing AI-based segmentation against manual analysis performed by human experts. The primary outcome was the analysis of upper airway images, with secondary metrics including accuracy, precision, dice similarity scores, and total volume differences.

Results from the meta-analyses indicated that AI tools achieved performance metrics above 90% for precision, dice similarity score, intersection over union, and recall. The total volume difference between AI and manual segmentation was reported as small but significantly above zero. The review's qualitative assessment also described promising results for AI segmentation efficacy. Most included studies were assessed as having a low risk of bias, and sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the meta-analysis findings, with no significant publication bias detected.

Key limitations noted by the authors include the need for many more studies before decisive conclusions can be drawn. Safety and tolerability data for the AI tools were not reported. The evidence demonstrates an association between AI use and high segmentation accuracy in this technical, image-analysis context. For clinical practice, these findings highlight the potential for AI to serve as an assistive tool in radiological and dental imaging workflows, but they do not yet support replacing expert manual segmentation.

Researchers reviewed existing studies to see how well artificial intelligence (AI) can analyze medical scans of the upper airway. The AI's job was to automatically create a detailed 3D model from cone-beam CT or CT scans, a task usually done manually by a radiologist or technician. The review included 11 studies, with data from 6 of them combined for a closer look.

The analysis found that AI tools performed this task with high accuracy. Key measures of performance, like precision and similarity to human-drawn models, were all above 90%. The AI's measurements of total airway volume were also very close to manual measurements, with only a small, consistent difference.

It's important to understand that this research is a review of early, technical studies. The results are promising for the accuracy of the AI software itself, but they do not yet prove it improves patient care or is ready for doctors to rely on in everyday practice. The authors themselves state that many more studies are needed before any firm conclusions can be made about using this technology clinically.

What this means for you:
Early research finds AI is accurate at mapping airways on scans, but it is not yet a standard clinical tool.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
OBJECTIVES: 3D segmentation of the upper airway is crucial for dental and medical practices. However, it is a difficult and daunting task. Like almost all other areas, AI can theoretically help in airway segmentation. Nevertheless, AI's efficacy remains unknown. This meta-analysis investigated this matter for the first time. MATERIAL AND METHODS: ‎Various search engines/databases/articles were searched for articles published until April 25, 2025. All English-language articles on the use of AI for upper airway evaluations based on CBCT or CT scans were included in the study. The desired population was considered studies assessing the upper airway. Intervention was the use of any tool of AI such as deep learning and machine learning for image analysis. The comparator was the manual analysis of CBCT or CT scans by human. The outcome was the analysis of upper airway on CBCT or CT images. The recorded and analyzed effect sizes were: accuracies, precisions, dice similarity scores, total volume differences, intersection over union (IoU), recall, or any other parameters relevant to segmentation. A meta-analysis was conducted for each of the mentioned parameters if adequate data were available. The outcome was the analysis of upper airway on CBCT or CT images (PROSPERO: CRD42024508004). RESULTS: Eleven studies were included, with 6 studies included in meta-analyses. Most studies had a low risk of bias in most aspects. The qualitative part of review showed promising results for AI segmentation. Four of the effects sizes were meta-analyzed: Precision,‎ dice similarity score, intersection over union, ‎ and recall were all above 90%.‎ Total volume difference was small but significantly above zero. Sensitivity analyses showed robustness of all meta-analysis results. Publication bias was insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: The results showed promising AI efficacies in 3D segmentation of the upper airway in CBCTs. However, much more studies are needed before decisive conclusions.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.