The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제10권6호
  • /
  • Pages.395-400
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A pilot study using machine learning methods about factors influencing prognosis of dental implants

  • Ha, Seung-Ryong (Department of Prosthodontics, Dankook University College of Dentistry Jukjeon Dental Hospital) ;
  • Park, Hyun Sung (Private Practice, The Seoul Dental Clinic) ;
  • Kim, Eung-Hee (Biomedical Knowledge Engineering Lab., Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Kim, Hong-Ki (Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry) ;
  • Yang, Jin-Yong (Private Practice, Yang's Dental Clinic) ;
  • Heo, Junyoung (Department of IT Engineering, Hansung University) ;
  • Yeo, In-Sung Luke (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University School of Dentistry)
  • 투고 : 2017.05.02
  • 심사 : 2017.09.17
  • 발행 : 2018.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. This study tried to find the most significant factors predicting implant prognosis using machine learning methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The data used in this study was based on a systematic search of chart files at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital for one year. In this period, oral and maxillofacial surgeons inserted 667 implants in 198 patients after consultation with a prosthodontist. The traditional statistical methods were inappropriate in this study, which analyzed the data of a small sample size to find a factor affecting the prognosis. The machine learning methods were used in this study, since these methods have analyzing power for a small sample size and are able to find a new factor that has been unknown to have an effect on the result. A decision tree model and a support vector machine were used for the analysis. RESULTS. The results identified mesio-distal position of the inserted implant as the most significant factor determining its prognosis. Both of the machine learning methods, the decision tree model and support vector machine, yielded the similar results. CONCLUSION. Dental clinicians should be careful in locating implants in the patient's mouths, especially mesio-distally, to minimize the negative complications against implant survival.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Academy of Osseointegration. 2010 Guidelines of the Academy of Osseointegration for the provision of dental implants and associated patient care. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:620-7.
  2. Kohner JS. Implant team: problems and solutions with osseointegrated implants. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1992;4:27-32.
  3. Garber DA, Belser UC. Restoration-driven implant placement with restoration-generated site development. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1995;16:796, 798-802, 804.
  4. Bryant SR. The effects of age, jaw site, and bone condition on oral implant outcomes. J Prosthodont 1998;11:470-90.
  5. Omran MT, Miley DD, McLeod DE, Garcia MN. Retrospective assessment of survival rate for short endosseous dental implants. Implant Dent 2015;24:185-91.
  6. Tolstunov L. Implant zones of the jaws: implant location and related success rate. J Oral Implantol 2007;33:211-20. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(2007)33[211:IZOTJI]2.0.CO;2
  7. Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Choosing or refusing oral implants: a prospective study of edentulous volunteers for a clinical trial. Int J Prosthodont 2005;18:483-8.
  8. Furey TS, Cristianini N, Duffy N, Bednarski DW, Schummer M, Haussler D. Support vector machine classification and validation of cancer tissue samples using microarray expression data. Bioinformatics 2000;16:906-14. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/16.10.906
  9. Mitchell TM. Machine Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1997. p. 414.
  10. Gambhir SS, Hoh CK, Phelps ME, Madar I, Maddahi J. Decision tree sensitivity analysis for cost-effectiveness of FDG-PET in the staging and management of non-small-cell lung carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1996;37:1428-36.
  11. Nakano Y, Takeshita T, Kamio N, Shiota S, Shibata Y, Suzuki N, Yoneda M, Hirofuji T, Yamashita Y. Supervised machine learning-based classification of oral malodor based on the microbiota in saliva samples. Artif Intell Med 2014;60:97-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2013.12.001
  12. Ward JJ, McGuffin LJ, Buxton BF, Jones DT. Secondary structure prediction with support vector machines. Bioinformatics 2003;19:1650-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btg223
  13. Chen J, Xing Y, Xi G, Chen J, Yi J, Zhao D, Wang J. A comparison of four data mining models: Bayes, neural network, SVM and decision trees in identifying syndromes in coronary heart disease. Advances in Neural Networks-ISNN 2007: Springer; 2007. p. 1274-9.
  14. Bullinger D, Frohlich H, Klaus F, Neubauer H, Frickenschmidt A, Henneges C, Zell A, Laufer S, Gleiter CH, Liebich H, Kammerer B. Bioinformatical evaluation of modified nucleosides as biomedical markers in diagnosis of breast cancer. Anal Chim Acta. 2008;618:29-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2008.04.048
  15. Fung G, Stoeckel J. SVM feature selection for classification of SPECT images of Alzheimer's disease using spatial information. Knowl Inf Syst 2007;11:243-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-006-0043-5
  16. Son YJ, Kim HG, Kim EH, Choi S, Lee SK. Application of support vector machine for prediction of medication adherence in heart failure patients. Healthc Inform Res 2010;16:253-9. https://doi.org/10.4258/hir.2010.16.4.253
  17. Hwang D, Wang HL. Medical contraindications to implant therapy: part I: absolute contraindications. Implant Dent 2006;15:353-60. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.id.0000247855.75691.03
  18. Hwang D, Wang HL. Medical contraindications to implant therapy: Part II: Relative contraindications. Implant Dent 2007;16:13-23. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e31803276c8
  19. Michalski RSE, Carbonell JGE, Mitchell TME. Machine learning: an artificial intelligence approach. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1984.
  20. Samuel AL. Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM J Res Dev 2000;44:206-26. https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.441.0206
  21. Freitag D. Machine learning for information extraction in informal domains. Mach Learn 2000;39:169-202. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007601113994
  22. Sebastiani F. Machine learning in automated text categorization. Acm Comput Surv 2002;34:1-47. https://doi.org/10.1145/505282.505283
  23. Ivanoff CJ, Sennerby L, Johansson C, Rangert B, Lekholm U. Influence of implant diameters on the integration of screw implants. An experimental study in rabbits. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997;26:141-8.
  24. Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S. Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol 2000;5:22-31. https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2000.5.1.22
  25. Lin S, Shi S, LeGeros RZ, LeGeros JP. Three-dimensional finite element analyses of four designs of a high-strength silicon nitride implant. Implant Dent 2000;9:53-60. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-200009010-00010
  26. Hermann JS, Cochran DL, Nummikoski PV, Buser D. Crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A radiographic evaluation of unloaded nonsubmerged and submerged implants in the canine mandible. J Periodontol 1997;68:1117-30. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.1997.68.11.1117
  27. Tarnow DP, Cho SC, Wallace SS. The effect of inter-implant distance on the height of inter-implant bone crest. J Periodontol 2000;71:546-9. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2000.71.4.546