Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 39
  • /
  • Pages.23.1-23.8
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validation of a new three-dimensional imaging system using comparative craniofacial anthropometry

  • Naini, Farhad B. (Kingston and St George's Hospitals and Medical School) ;
  • Akram, Sarah (King's College London Dental Institute) ;
  • Kepinska, Julia (Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust) ;
  • Garagiola, Umberto (Department of Reconstructive and Diagnostic Surgical Sciences, University of Milan) ;
  • McDonald, Fraser (King's College London Dental Institute) ;
  • Wertheim, David (Faculty of Science, Engineering and Computing, Kingston University)
  • Received : 2017.07.13
  • Accepted : 2017.07.19
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to validate a new three-dimensional craniofacial stereophotogrammetry imaging system (3dMDface) through comparison with manual facial surface anthropometry. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference between craniofacial measurements using anthropometry vs. the 3dMDface system. Methods: Facial images using the new 3dMDface system were taken from six randomly selected subjects, sitting in natural head position, on six separate occasions each 1 week apart, repeated twice at each sitting. Exclusion criteria were excess facial hair, facial piercings and undergoing current dentofacial treatment. 3dMDvultus software allowed facial landmarks to be marked and measurements recorded. The same measurements were taken using manual anthropometry, using soluble eyeliner to pinpoint landmarks, and sliding and spreading callipers and measuring tape to measure distances. The setting for the investigation was a dental teaching hospital and regional (secondary and tertiary care) cleft centre. The main outcome measure was comparison of the craniofacial measurements using the two aforementioned techniques. Results: The results showed good agreement between craniofacial measurements using the 3dMDface system compared with manual anthropometry. For all measurements, except chin height and labial fissure width, there was a greater variability with the manual method compared to 3D assessment. Overall, there was a significantly greater variability in manual compared with 3D assessments (p < 0.02). Conclusions: The 3dMDface system is validated for craniofacial measurements.

Keywords

References

  1. Aynechi N, Larson BE, Leon-Salazar V, Beiraghi S (2011) Accuracy and precision of a 3D anthropometric facial analysis with and without landmark labelling before image acquisition. Angle Orthod 81:245-252 https://doi.org/10.2319/041810-210.1
  2. Heike CL, Upson K, Stuhag E, Weinberg SM (2010) 3D digital stereophotogrammetry: a practical guide to facial image acquisition. Head Face Med 6:18 https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-160X-6-18
  3. Ireland AJ, McNamara C, Clover MJ et al (2008) 3D surface imaging in dentistry-what we are looking at. Br Dent J 205:387-392 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.845
  4. Kau HC, Richmond S, Zhurov AI, Hunter L (2004) The investigation of changing facial appearance of identical twins employing a three-dimensional laser imaging system. Orthod Craniofac Res 8:85-70
  5. Yamada T, Mori Y, Katsuhiro M, Katsuaki M, Tsukamoto Y (2002) Threedimensional analysis of facial morphology in normal Japanese children as control data for cleft surgery. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 39:517-526 https://doi.org/10.1597/1545-1569(2002)039<0517:TDAOFM>2.0.CO;2
  6. Hajeer MY, Ayoub AF, Millet DT, Siebert JP (2004) Application of 3D imaging in orthodontics: part I. J Orthod 31:62-70 https://doi.org/10.1179/146531204225011346
  7. Schendel AC, Duncan KS, Lane C (2011) Image fusion in preoperative planning. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 19:577-590 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsc.2011.07.002
  8. Heimlich A (1954) Dental photography: its application in clinical orthodontics. Angle Orthod 24:70-78
  9. Savara BS (1965) Applications of photogrammetry for quantitative study of tooth and face morphology. Am J Phys Anthropol 23:427-434 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330230417
  10. Burke PH, Beard LFH (1967) A preliminary investigation into the accuracy of a simplified system evolved for contour mapping by photography. Am J Orthod 53:769-782 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(67)90121-2
  11. Moss JP, Coombes AM, Linney AD (1991) Methods of three-dimensional analysis of patients with asymmetry of the face. Proc Finn Dent Soc 87:139-149
  12. Aung SC, Ngim RC, Lee ST (1995) Evaluation of the laser scanner as a surface measuring tool and its accuracy compared with direct facial anthropometric measurements. British J Plast Surg 48:551-558 https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1226(95)90043-8
  13. Bush K, Antonyshyn O (1996) Three-dimensional facial anthropometry using laser surface scanner: validation of the technique. Plast Reconstr Surg 98:226-235 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199608000-00004
  14. Hajeer MY, Ayoub AF, Millet DT, Bock M, Siebert JP (2002) Three-dimensional imaging in orthognathic surgery-the clinical application of a new method. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 17:318-330
  15. Moss JP, Ismail SFH, Hennessy RJ (2003) Three-dimensional assessment of treatment outcomes on the face. Orthod Craniofac Res 6:1-6 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0280.2003.2c096.x
  16. Kau HC, Richmond S, Incrapera A, English J, Xia JJ (2007) Three-dimensional surface acquisition systems for the study of facial morphology and their application in maxillofacial surgery. Int J Med Robotics Comput Assist Surg 3:97-110 https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.141
  17. Olsen OV, Paulsen RR, Hojgaar L (2010) Motion tracking in narrow space: a structured light approach. Med Image Comput Assist Interv 13:253-260
  18. Yip E, Smith A, Yoshino M (2004) Volumetric evaluation of facial swelling utilizing a 3-D range camera. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 33:179-182 https://doi.org/10.1054/ijom.2003.0501
  19. Takasaki H (1970) Moire Topography. Appl Opt 9:1467-1472 https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.9.001467
  20. Tzou CHJ, Frey M (2011) Evolution of 3D surface imaging systems in facial plastic surgery. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 19:592-602
  21. Kawai T, Natsume N, Shibata H (1997) Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology using moire stripes. Part 1. Method. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 19:356-358
  22. Motoyoshi M, Namura S, Arai HY (1992) A three-dimensional measuring system for the human face using three-directional photography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 101:431-440 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(92)70117-S
  23. Yuen K, Inokuchi I, Maeta M (1997) Evaluation of facial palsy by Moire topography index. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 5:567-572
  24. Peng L, Cooke MS (1999) Fifteen-year reproducibility of natural head posture: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 116:82-85 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70306-9
  25. Ayoub A, Garrahy A, Hood C et al (2003) Validation of a vision based, threedimensional facial imaging system. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 40:523-529 https://doi.org/10.1597/02-067
  26. Khambay B, Nairn N, Bell A, Miller J, Bowman A, Ayoub AF (2007) Validation and reproducibility of a high resolution three-dimensional facial imaging system. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 46:27-32
  27. Tzou CH, Artner NM, Pona I et al (2014) Comparison of three-dimensional surface-imaging systems. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 67:489-497 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.01.003
  28. Aldridge K, Boyadjiev SA, Capone GT, DeLeon VB, Richtsmeier JT (2005) Precision and error of three-dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images. Am J Med Genet 138A:247-253 https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.30959
  29. Weinberg SM, Naidoo S, Govier DP, Martin RA, Kane AA, Marazita ML (2006) Anthropometric precision and accuracy of digital three-dimensional photogrammetry: comparing the Genex and 3dMD imaging systems with one another and with direct anthropometry. J Craniofac Surg 17:477-483 https://doi.org/10.1097/00001665-200605000-00015
  30. Maal TJ, Van Loon B, Plooij JM et al (2010) Registration of 3-dimensional facial photographs for clinical use. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 68:2391-2401 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.10.017
  31. Lubbers HT, Medinger L, Kruse A, Gratz KW, Matthews F (2010) Precision and accuracy of the 3dMD photogrammetric system in craniomaxillofacial application. J Craniofac Surg 21:763-767 https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0b013e3181d841f7
  32. Ghoddousi H, Edler R, Haers P, Wertheim D, Greenhill D (2007) Comparison of three methods of facial measurement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 36:250-258 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2006.10.001
  33. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 8:307-310
  34. Weinberg SM, Scott NM, Neiswanger K, Brandon CA, Marazita ML (2004) Digital three-dimensional photogrammetry: evaluation of anthropometric precision and accuracy using a Genex 3D camera system. Cleft Palate Craniof J 41:507-518 https://doi.org/10.1597/03-066.1
  35. Naini FB (2011) Facial aesthetics: concepts and clinical diagnosis. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford

Cited by

  1. Sources of variation in the 3dMDface and Vectra H1 3D facial imaging systems vol.10, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61333-3
  2. The Vectra M3 3-dimensional digital stereophotogrammetry system: A reliable technique for detecting chin asymmetry vol.51, pp.None, 2021, https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20210168
  3. Accuracy of three-dimensional photogrammetry and cone beam computed tomography based on linear measurements in patients with facial deformities vol.50, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20200001