Reproducibility of 3D scanning in the periorbital region

Hollander, M.H.J.; Kraeima, Joep; Meesters, Anne M. L.; Delli, Konstantina; Vissink, Arjan; Jansma, J.; Schepers, Rutger H.

doi:10.1038/s41598-021-83335-5

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results showed that the Artec Space Spider system had the lowest RMSE and the smallest MSD among the three systems tested. This is consistent with previous studies that have also found the Artec system to have high accuracy and reliability 8, 19 . The Bellus3D Dental Pro application had the highest deviation from the ground truth model (MSD = 0.46 mm), which is in line with some previous studies that have reported limitations with this system 20 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Comparison of three-dimensional imaging of the nose using three different 3D- photography systems

Ritschl,

Classen,

Kilbertus

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives New 3D technologies for superficial soft tissue changes, especially in plastic and reconstructive surgical procedures, can improve the planning and documentation of facial surgeries. The purpose of this study was to compare and determine the applicability and feasibility of three different 3D-photography systems in clinical practice imaging the nose. Methods and materials A total of 16 healthy non-operated noses were included in this prospective study. A plaster model of each nose was produced, digitized, and converted to an .stl mesh (= ground truth model). Three-dimensional images of each nose were then taken using Artec Space Spider (gold standard), Planmeca ProFace®, and the Bellus3D Dental Pro application. All resulting .stl files were aligned to the ground truth model using MeshLab software, and the root mean square error (RMSE), mean surface distance (MSD), and Hausdorff distance (HD) were calculated. Results The Artec Space Spider 3D-photography system showed significantly better results compared to the two other systems in regard to RMSE, MSD, and HD (each p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between Planmeca ProFace® and Bellus3D Dental Pro in terms of RMSE, MSD, and HD. Overall, all three camera systems showed a clinically acceptable deviation to the reference model (range: -1.23–1.57 mm). Conclusions The three evaluated 3D-photography systems were suitable for nose imaging in the clinical routine. While Artec Space Spider showed the highest accuracy, the Bellus3D Dental Pro app may be the most feasible option for everyday clinical use due to its portability, ease of use, and low cost. This study presents three different systems, allowing readers to extrapolate to other systems when planning to introduce 3D photography in the clinical routine.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Comparison of three-dimensional imaging of the nose using three different 3D- photography systems

Ritschl,

Classen,

Kilbertus

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Artec Space Spider’s results were found to be most valid compared to Artec Eva, Vectra H1, Bellus and SNAP after scanning plaster statues with balls attached; the linear measurements were used for comparison purposes 13 . The reliability of scanning the peri-orbital region with the Artec Space Spider was excellent, at 0.1–0.2 cmm 14 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity of handheld structured light scanners and a static stereophotogrammetry system in facial three-dimensional surface imaging

Schipper,

Merema,

Hollander

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several new systems for three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging of the face have become available to assess changes following orthognathic or facial surgery. Before they can be implemented in practice, their reliability and validity must be established. Our aim, therefore, was to study the intra- and inter-system reliability and validity of 3dMD (stereophotogrammetry), Artec Eva and Artec Space Spider (both structured light scanners). Intra- and inter-system reliability, expressed in root mean square distance, was determined by scanning a mannequin’s head and the faces of healthy volunteers multiple times. Validity was determined by comparing the linear measurements of the scans with the known distances of a 3D printed model. Post-processing errors were also calculated. Intra-system reliability after scanning the mannequin’s head was best with the Artec Space Spider (0.04 mm Spider; 0.07 mm 3dMD; 0.08 mm Eva). The least difference in inter-system reliability after scanning the mannequin’s head was between the Artec Space Spider and Artec Eva. The best intra-system reliability after scanning human subjects was with the Artec Space Spider (0.15 mm Spider; 0.20 mm Eva; 0.23 mm 3dMD). The least difference in inter-system reliability after scanning human subjects was between the Artec Eva and Artec Space Spider. The most accurate linear measurement validity occurred with the Artec Space Spider. The post-processing error was 0.01 mm for all the systems. The Artec Space Spider is the most reliable and valid scanning system.

show abstract

“…To ensure scanning accuracy, we chose to scan with EinScan SP (Shining 3D, Hangzhou, China), which provides an accuracy better than 0.05 mm [28]. Its accuracy is below clinically accepted 1 mm measuring error threshold for both the natural head and fixated positions per Hollander et al [29]. This 3D scanning process generates a Wavefront (.obj) file and an image file that includes the mesh and texture data, which provides visual details and surface characteristics of the object.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of an augmented reality guidance system for head and neck cancer resection

Tong,

Xu,

Pfister

et al. 2023

Healthcare Tech Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of head‐mounted augmented reality (AR) for surgeries has grown rapidly in recent years. AR aids in intraoperative surgical navigation through overlaying three‐dimensional (3D) holographic reconstructions of medical data. However, performing AR surgeries on complex areas such as the head and neck region poses challenges in terms of accuracy and speed. This study explores the feasibility of an AR guidance system for resections of positive tumour margins in a cadaveric specimen. The authors present an intraoperative solution that enables surgeons to upload and visualize holographic reconstructions of resected cadaver tissues. The solution involves using a 3D scanner to capture detailed scans of the resected tissue, which are subsequently uploaded into our software. The software converts the scans of resected tissues into specimen holograms that are viewable through a head‐mounted AR display. By re‐aligning these holograms with cadavers with gestures or voice commands, surgeons can navigate the head and neck tumour site. This workflow can run concurrently with frozen section analysis. On average, the authors achieve an uploading time of 2.98 min, visualization time of 1.05 min, and re‐alignment time of 4.39 min, compared to the 20 to 30 min typical for frozen section analysis. The authors achieve a mean re‐alignment error of 3.1 mm. The authors’ software provides a foundation for new research and product development for using AR to navigate complex 3D anatomy in surgery.

show abstract

Reproducibility of 3D scanning in the periorbital region

Cited by 19 publications

References 33 publications

Comparison of three-dimensional imaging of the nose using three different 3D- photography systems

Comparison of three-dimensional imaging of the nose using three different 3D- photography systems

Reliability and validity of handheld structured light scanners and a static stereophotogrammetry system in facial three-dimensional surface imaging

Development of an augmented reality guidance system for head and neck cancer resection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About