LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Precision in 3-Dimensional Surface Imaging of the Face: A Handheld Scanner Comparison Performed in a Cadaveric Model

Photo by thinkmagically from unsplash

BACKGROUND Handheld 3-dimensional surface imaging (3DSI) devices of various precision are becoming more versatile in their applications and more widely accepted by clinicians for documentation. OBJECTIVES The authors sought to… Click to show full abstract

BACKGROUND Handheld 3-dimensional surface imaging (3DSI) devices of various precision are becoming more versatile in their applications and more widely accepted by clinicians for documentation. OBJECTIVES The authors sought to compare the precision of facial volumetric change measurements of 3 3DSI devices in the cadaveric model: Eva (Artec 3D Inc., Luxembourg), Sense (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC), and iSense (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC). METHODS A total of 336 scanning and analysis procedures were carried out in 4 cephalic specimens (mean age, 77.25 ± 24.3 years; mean BMI, 21.76 ± 6.6 kg/m2). Two superficial and 2 supraperiosteal regions of interest were injected with 0.5-cc aliquots and subsequently scanned using the 3 different scanners. Correlation coefficients between the injected and measured volume were computed. RESULTS The correlation coefficient for the Eva scanner was for subcutaneous regions of interest rp = 0.935 and for the supraperiosteal regions of interest rp = 0.966, compared with rp = 0.760 and rp = 0.364 (superficial vs supraperiosteal) for the Sense and rp = 0.694 and rp = 0.382 (superficial vs supraperiosteal) for the iSense scanner. CONCLUSIONS 3DSI devices are capable of measuring surface volume changes of the face at a level of 0.5-cc surface volume change and can thus be regarded as useful tools in the preinterventional, intrainterventional, and postinterventional phases of a treatment. One of the 3 evaluated scanners provided very high correlation coefficients between the injected and the measured volume (Eva), whereas the other evaluated 3DSI devices provided moderate (Sense) and low (iSense) coefficients.

Keywords: 3dsi devices; surface imaging; cadaveric model; surface; dimensional surface; precision

Journal Title: Aesthetic Surgery Journal
Year Published: 2019

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.