Comparison of 3D Scanning Versus 2D Photography for the Identification of Facial Soft-Tissue Landmarks

Zogheib, Tatiana; Jacobs, Reinhilde; Bornstein, MM; Agbaje, Jimoh Olubanwo; Anumendem, D.; Klazen, Yoram P.; Politis, Constantinus

doi:10.2174/1874210601812010061

Cited by 29 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 Even though quantitative studies exist in the literature, these devices have barely been compared in a qualitative manner. 24,27,28 Stebel et al qualitatively compared 2D and 3D stereophotogrammetry images to evaluate nasolabial aesthetics and found that SPG was more reliable and informative than 2D imaging, which corresponds with our findings. 28 However, in our study, the observers were more confident with LS than with 2D images, in contrast with the findings of Zogheib et al 24 The main limitations of this study are related to laser scanning, such as motion artefacts in the orbital region related to the blinking reflex, the application of chin support, and a long capture process, which might have influenced the results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…24,27,28 Stebel et al qualitatively compared 2D and 3D stereophotogrammetry images to evaluate nasolabial aesthetics and found that SPG was more reliable and informative than 2D imaging, which corresponds with our findings. 28 However, in our study, the observers were more confident with LS than with 2D images, in contrast with the findings of Zogheib et al 24 The main limitations of this study are related to laser scanning, such as motion artefacts in the orbital region related to the blinking reflex, the application of chin support, and a long capture process, which might have influenced the results. 1,27,29 To overcome these limitations, we recommend utilizing marker-free fixed 3D stereophotogrammetric systems such as the 3D Vectra ® H1, 3dMDface TM (3dMD LLC, Atlanta, USA) and Di3D TM (Dimensional Imaging, Glasgow, UK) imaging systems.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…2,19 Zogheib et al compared 2D imaging and laser scanning to direct measurements and found that linear measurements with LS were closer to the clinical standard than measurements made with 2D imaging, while in the present study, SPG had significantly less error than both 2D and LS. 24 The images captured with LS showed distortions around the eye region, and the measurements had higher variability than those obtained using SPG, even though it was lower than the variability of 2D imaging. This variability in LS accuracy could have resulted from motion artefacts owing to patient movement, facial expressions, or eye distortion caused by the blinking reflex.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Accuracy and reliability of 2-dimensional photography versus 3-dimensional soft tissue imaging

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study was conducted to objectively and subjectively compare the accuracy and reliability of 2-dimensional (2D) photography and 3-dimensional (3D) soft tissue imaging. Materials and Methods: Facial images of 50 volunteers (25 males, 25 females) were captured with a Nikon D800 2D camera (Nikon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), 3D stereophotogrammetry (SPG), and laser scanning (LS). All subjects were imaged in a relaxed, closed-mouth position with a normal smile. The 2D images were then exported to Mirror ® Software (Canfield Scientific, Inc, NJ, USA) and the 3D images into Proplan CMF ® software (version 2.1, Materialise HQ, Leuven, Belgium) for further evaluation. For an objective evaluation, 2 observers identified soft tissue landmarks and performed linear measurements on subjects' faces (direct measurements) and both linear and angular measurements on all images (indirect measurements). For a qualitative analysis, 10 dental observers and an expert in facial imaging (subjective gold standard) completed a questionnaire regarding facial characteristics. The reliability of the quantitative data was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients, whereas the Fleiss kappa was calculated for qualitative data. Results: Linear and angular measurements carried out on 2D and 3D images showed excellent inter-observer and intra-observer reliability. The 2D photographs displayed the highest combined total error for linear measurements. SPG performed better than LS, with borderline significance (P = 0.052). The qualitative assessment showed no significant differences among the 2D and 3D imaging modalities. Conclusion: SPG was found to a reliable and accurate tool for the morphological evaluation of soft tissue in comparison to 2D imaging and laser scanning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accuracy and reliability of 2-dimensional photography versus 3-dimensional soft tissue imaging

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(11) According to Zogheib et al, 3D imaging could enable angular measurement of human face as much as a photograph. (12) Through these current studies, 3D imaging could be used to study whether surgical techniques have the desired effect on the nose.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Reliability Between 3D Imaging And 2D Photography For External Nasal Anthropometry

Seo

Cha

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study investigates and compare the reliability and reproducibility of two facial anthropometric methods about external nasal angles, 3D imaging and conventional 2D photography. Methods: 2D photograph images and 3D images about external nose of 30 volunteers were taken using digital camera and Morpheus 3D scanner. To evaluate intra-rater reliability, each images were taken over two different days for each subject by the same researcher. To evaluate inter-rater reliability, another researcher took each images for each subject on the first day. The reliability of each method for measuring 4 external nasal angle is obtained using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and compared.Results: Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of both 3D imaging and 2D photography had excellent agreement in all 4 nasal angles. In the nasofacial angular parameter, Inter-rater ICC, 2D photography was significantly higher than 3D imaging. Result of intra-rater ICC also showed both 3D imaging and 2D photography had good reliability in all 4 nasal angles. Similar to those of inter-rater ICC, nasofacial angular parameter showed statistically significant differences between 3D imaging and 2D photography.Conclusion: In terms of reliability, both 2D and 3D showed appropriate anthropometric results and considering its own advantage, each methods can be used complementarily.

show abstract

“…To offset these drawbacks, advances have been made in the capture and analysis of digital 3D photos, also known as stereophotogrammetry, which offers great development potential in the diagnosis and treatment of facial deformities (Zogheib et al, 2018). These captures can analyze facial morphology and thus craniofacial growth, changes in soft tissues after facial surgery, planning studies and digital surgical simulation, among others (Vittert et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional Analysis of Nasolabial Soft Tissues While Smiling Using stereophotogrammetry (3dMDTM)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nasolabial region is the central esthetic unit of the face and is considered one of the most important determinants of the facial esthetic. The facial morphometry of soft tissues is a very important tool in facial surgery. Advances have been made recently in the capture and analysis of 3D images, which offer great development potential in the diagnosis and treatment of facial deformities. The aim of this study was to characterize the nasolabial region of patient candidates for orthognathic surgery using 3D facial captures. A study was conducted to characterize the width of the nasal base and the nasolabial angle in adult patients through 3D photographs. 30 subjects were included, taking two 3D photos each, one in a resting position and the other smiling. The three-dimensional capture was done with the 3dMDface System. The measurements were taken with the 3dMD Vultus software. The length of the alar base was an average of 34.3 ± 2.6 mm at rest, and 39.1 ± 2.9 mm smiling. The mean of the nasolabial angle was 104.6 ± 9.6° at rest and 105.4 ± 14.3º smiling. Additionally, the distance of the alar base smiling compared to its distance at rest increased an average of 4.83 mm, whereas the nasolabial angle smiling increased an average of 0.8º compared to at rest. In this study, the nasolabial angle did not present any significant changes so that its assessments in the case of facial modifications can be standard; the width of the nasal base is significantly modified with the smile and thus a more intense study of any type of modification in this area is required.

show abstract

Comparison of 3D Scanning Versus 2D Photography for the Identification of Facial Soft-Tissue Landmarks

Cited by 29 publications

References 31 publications

Accuracy and reliability of 2-dimensional photography versus 3-dimensional soft tissue imaging

Accuracy and reliability of 2-dimensional photography versus 3-dimensional soft tissue imaging

Comparing Reliability Between 3D Imaging And 2D Photography For External Nasal Anthropometry

Three-dimensional Analysis of Nasolabial Soft Tissues While Smiling Using stereophotogrammetry (3dMDTM)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About