“…Many papers can be found in the literature comparing results achieved with different solutions [5], direct calliper measures [6,17], orthogonal photography [26], CT [27], and 3D photogrammetry images [17,[27][28][29][30]. They permit some general conclusions to be drawn: first, calliper measurements are a bit smaller (1-4 mm [17], around 2% [5]) than the digital photogrammetric results, possibly due to the pressure of the callipers and/or the use of skullcaps for photogrammetric solutions [17]; second, although CT yields the best solution [6], it is not recommended since the patient has to be sedated [5], and it constitutes an avoidable exposure to radiation that entails a higher risk of malignancies in later life; third, other solutions, such as orthogonal photography [6] or, better, 3D photogrammetry, since it is more flexible in terms of image acquisition ("fast, easy, and independent of the examiner" [27]) are preferred.…”