Fractal Analysis and Artificial Intelligence for Radiographic Detection of Periodontal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Accurate diagnosis and staging of periodontitis rely on clinical measurements and radiographic assessment of alveolar bone loss. <b>Methods</b>: Studies published between 1 January 2020 and 31 October 2025 were searched in the Web of Science and PubMed databases in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Original research articles that evaluated periodontal pathology on radiographic images using fractal analysis and/or artificial intelligence approaches, with clearly defined methodologies, were included. Due to methodological heterogeneity, a quantitative meta-analysis was not performed, and the findings were summarized using a narrative synthesis approach. <b>Results</b>: Of 346 records, 80 studies (9 fractal, 71 AI) met the inclusion criteria. Fractal analysis studies predominantly calculated the fractal dimension on panoramic or periapical radiographs using the box-counting method. In artificial intelligence studies, the task types mainly comprised classification, segmentation, detection, and hybrid approaches (multi-stage models or models combining multiple tasks). Panoramic and intraoral radiographs were the predominant imaging modalities. Performance metrics were reported across wide ranges (sensitivity 0.23-1.00; accuracy 0.506-1.00; specificity 0.41-0.99; F1 score 0.15-0.99; AUC 0.75-0.99), and in some studies, these metrics were only partially reported. <b>Conclusions</b>: Fractal analysis and artificial intelligence approaches offer objective and reproducible assessment of periodontal bone loss; however, methodological and reporting heterogeneity limit comparability and generalizability. Standardization of ROI definitions, datasets, study designs, and performance reporting is needed to improve clinical applicability. Future research should also explore hybrid models that combine the quantitative microstructural insights of fractal analysis with the automated detection capabilities of artificial intelligence to enhance diagnostic precision.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diagnostics
Published
2026-03-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16050782
Primary Topic
Dental Radiography and Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fractal Analysis and Artificial Intelligence for Radiographic Detection of Periodontal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review

Z. GÜNER, Fatma KARACAOĞLU, Nilsun Bağış, Mehmet Güçlü et al.
Diagnostics
Dental Radiography and Imaging
article

Fractal Analysis and Artificial Intelligence for Radiographic Detection of Periodontal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review

Z. GÜNER, Fatma KARACAOĞLU, Nilsun Bağış, Mehmet Güçlü, Kaan Orhan
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: Accurate diagnosis and staging of periodontitis rely on clinical measurements and radiographic assessment of alveolar bone loss. <b>Methods</b>: Studies published between 1 January 2020 and 31 October 2025 were searched in the Web of Science and PubMed databases in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Original research articles that evaluated periodontal pathology on radiographic images using fractal analysis and/or artificial intelligence approaches, with clearly defined methodologies, were included. Due to methodological heterogeneity, a quantitative meta-analysis was not performed, and the findings were summarized using a narrative synthesis approach. <b>Results</b>: Of 346 records, 80 studies (9 fractal, 71 AI) met the inclusion criteria. Fractal analysis studies predominantly calculated the fractal dimension on panoramic or periapical radiographs using the box-counting method. In artificial intelligence studies, the task types mainly comprised classification, segmentation, detection, and hybrid approaches (multi-stage models or models combining multiple tasks). Panoramic and intraoral radiographs were the predominant imaging modalities. Performance metrics were reported across wide ranges (sensitivity 0.23-1.00; accuracy 0.506-1.00; specificity 0.41-0.99; F1 score 0.15-0.99; AUC 0.75-0.99), and in some studies, these metrics were only partially reported. <b>Conclusions</b>: Fractal analysis and artificial intelligence approaches offer objective and reproducible assessment of periodontal bone loss; however, methodological and reporting heterogeneity limit comparability and generalizability. Standardization of ROI definitions, datasets, study designs, and performance reporting is needed to improve clinical applicability. Future research should also explore hybrid models that combine the quantitative microstructural insights of fractal analysis with the automated detection capabilities of artificial intelligence to enhance diagnostic precision.

DiagnosticsVol. 16(5)
Ankara University (TR), Shandong University (CN), Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi (TR)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Dental Radiography and Imaging
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.