Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Precision in 3-Dimensional Surface Imaging of the Face: A Handheld Scanner Comparison Performed in a Cadaveric Model.
Koban, Konstantin C; Cotofana, Sebastian; Frank, Konstantin; Green, Jeremy B; Etzel, Lucas; Li, Zhouxiao; Giunta, Riccardo E; Schenck, Thilo L.
Afiliação
  • Koban KC; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Cotofana S; Department of Medical Education, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY.
  • Frank K; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Green JB; Skin Associates of South Florida, Coral Gables, FL.
  • Etzel L; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Li Z; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Giunta RE; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
  • Schenck TL; Department for Hand, Plastic and Aesthetic Surgery, Ludwig - Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.
Aesthet Surg J ; 39(4): NP36-NP44, 2019 03 14.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30239592
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.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Imageamento Tridimensional / Face / Preenchedores Dérmicos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Imageamento Tridimensional / Face / Preenchedores Dérmicos Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article