Pearl vs Overjet: what the clearances and the cases show
A neutral table. The two verified cases are not the same task, and this page does not score either product.
Short answer
Last checked against the case studies linked on this page. Those cases keep their own source dates.
Pearl Second Opinion is named in one vendor-reported imaging case, Blue Court Dental in Harrow. Overjet on this site is named in a vendor-reported insurance-verification case, Bridge Mill Dental Care in Indian Land, South Carolina, not in an X-ray trial. Neither case publishes the practice's price or its practice management system. The FDA table is only the records opened on .
Side by side
| Item | Pearl | Overjet |
|---|---|---|
| Verified case | Blue Court Dental, Harrow. Vendor-reported. | Bridge Mill Dental Care, Indian Land, SC. Vendor-reported. Insurance verification, not imaging. |
| What the case says | October 2024 to January 2025: 145 X-rays, 35 patients, 44 early carious lesions. Dentists had found 12. Pearl calls the other 32 a 73% detection rate. The case says that is not a sensitivity. Nine lesions, Pearl says, needed immediate reassessment. No minutes saved are stated. | Overjet says the practice saves 15+ hours a week (case study, December 2025) and that verifications come back 85% or more complete, against about 50% earlier. A separate undated Ivy page quotes four hours a day. Neither says how the time was measured. |
| What it detects, from a letter we opened | K210365, decision 4 March 2022: bitewing and periapical radiographs of permanent teeth, patients 12 or older, second reader. Named findings include caries, margin discrepancy, calculus, periapical radiolucency, and restorations (crowns, bridges, implants, root canals, fillings). | K231678, decision 21 September 2023: aids detection of periapical radiolucencies on permanent teeth on periapical radiographs, patients 12 or older, concurrent read, not a replacement for the dentist. Other Overjet rows below are database records only. Their indications were not opened, so this page does not say what those devices detect. |
| PMS in the case | Not stated. | Not stated. |
| Public price | Not published. | Not published for this practice. Vendor-reported category range in Overjet's October 2025 blog, quoted in the case: $200–$800 a month. That is not Bridge Mill's price. |
| 510(k) records opened | K210365, K250525, K242600 | K212519, K222746, K231678, K233738, K261059 |
FDA clearances opened on 23 October 2026
| Company | Device | 510(k) | Decision date | Decision | What we opened | What that source says it detects | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pearl | Second Opinion | K210365 | Substantially equivalent | Decision letter | The letter says it is computer-aided detection software for bitewing and periapical radiographs of permanent teeth in patients 12 or older, used as a second reader. It names caries, margin discrepancy, calculus, periapical radiolucency, and restorations (crowns, bridges, implants, root canals, fillings). The letter says an MRMC study showed statistically significant aided-reader improvement for those four pathologies. The letter text we used does not state a sensitivity or specificity figure. | FDA record | |
| Pearl | Second Opinion Panoramic | K250525 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device, the decision date, substantial equivalence, and product code MYN. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record | |
| Pearl | Second Opinion Periapical Radiolucency Contours | K242600 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device, the decision date, substantial equivalence, and product code MYN. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record | |
| Overjet | Caries Assist | K212519 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device Overjet Caries Assist, the decision date, substantial equivalence, and product code MYN. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record | |
| Overjet | Caries Assist | K222746 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device, the decision date, and substantial equivalence. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record | |
| Overjet | Periapical Radiolucency Assist | K231678 | Substantially equivalent | Decision letter | The letter says it aids detection of periapical radiolucencies on permanent teeth on periapical radiographs, as a concurrent read, for patients 12 or older. It is not a replacement for the dentist, and it is for prescription use. | FDA record | |
| Overjet | Caries Assist-Pediatric | K233738 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device, the decision date, and substantial equivalence. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record | |
| Overjet | Multi-Image Caries and Charting Assist | K261059 | Substantially equivalent | Database record only | Not stated here. The database record names the device, the decision date, substantial equivalence, product codes MYN and QIH, and that a predetermined change control plan was authorized. The indications PDF was not opened. | FDA record |
These are the 510(k) records opened on 23 October 2026. This is not a complete list of either company's clearances. A 510(k) decision means the FDA found the device substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate. It is not an FDA approval. Opened .
Tool pages: Pearl Second Opinion · Overjet · Imaging hub.
Questions
Which is better, Pearl or Overjet?
This page does not pick one. The verified cases are different jobs. Pearl's case is a vendor report of X-ray review at Blue Court Dental in Harrow. Overjet's case on this site is a vendor report of insurance verification at Bridge Mill Dental Care in Indian Land, South Carolina. There is no Overjet imaging case here.
What FDA clearances were opened?
Eight records, opened on 23 October 2026. Letters: Pearl Second Opinion, K210365, decision 4 March 2022, and Overjet Periapical Radiolucency Assist, K231678, decision 21 September 2023. The other six rows are FDA database records. Their indications PDFs were not opened, so those rows do not say what the device detects. The list is not complete. A 510(k) decision is substantial equivalence, not an FDA approval.
What do the verified cases say?
Pearl says that from October 2024 to January 2025, across 145 X-rays from 35 patients at Blue Court Dental, Second Opinion identified 44 early carious lesions and the dentists had found 12. Pearl calls the other 32 a 73% detection rate. The case says that is not a sensitivity. Overjet says Bridge Mill saves 15+ hours a week on insurance checks, and a separate undated page quotes four hours a day. Both cases are vendor-reported. Neither publishes the practice's price or its practice management system.
What is the public price?
Not published for either practice. The Blue Court case gives no price. Bridge Mill's price is not disclosed. Overjet's October 2025 blog, quoted in that case, gives a category range of $200–$800 a month. That is not Bridge Mill's price. This page does not add a price from a review or a reseller.
The same text is at /compare/pearl-vs-overjet.md.