The possibilities of a portable low-budget three-dimensional stereophotogrammetry system in neonates: a prospective growth analysis and analysis of accuracy

Abstract

BackgroundWith the technical development, portable three-dimensional (3D) photogrammetry systems are becoming more en vogue because of cost-effectiveness and comparable accuracy to common stationary 3D systems. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of a low-budget portable system for 3D image acquisition with special regard to the gracile nasal region in neonates. Furthermore, the study aimed to establish a 3D data set of the first 180 days post partum.MethodsThirty-three healthy, full-term newborn were enrolled and 3D photographs were prospectively taken monthly with a portable low-budget 3D stereophotogrammetry system (FUEL3D® SCANIFY®) for six months. In the third month, age-matched and corresponding 3D models were acquired by taking an impression of the perinasal area. The resulting plaster models were scanned (3Shape D700, 3Shape® A/S, Denmark). Three examiners analyzed independently 21 defined landmarks of the generated Standard Tessellation Language files with regard to accuracy by using 3dMDvultus™ software. A semi-automatic 3D best-fit analysis of 3D photo and plaster models were performed by using Geomagic® and the Root Mean Squared (RMS) errors were calculated.ResultsStatistically significant changes of midfacial distances and angles with a focus on nasal growth during the first 180 days postpartum could be specified in absolute and relative dimensions. Best-fit analysis in the third month revealed a RMS error of 0.72 ± 0.22 mm with a mean standard deviation of 0.71 ± 0.21 mm.ConclusionsThe analyzed portable 3D stereophotogrammetry system is a feasible methodology with good accuracy, even in newborn. A description of the growth as well as the establishment of a 3D data set was performed. Its implementation for basic documentation for example in cleft patients is possible and might reduce the need for impressions and facilitate the communications with parents and the interdisciplinary team.

Simultaneous, radiation-free registration of the dentoalveolar position and the face by combining 3D photography with a portable scanner and impression-taking

“…In addition, facial 3D photography has reached a high level of accuracy and reproducibility, even with portable devices [11, 13, 14]. Additionally, intraoral scanners have become a standardized and promising tool and the direct data capturing in terms of scanning/digitalization of the impression achieves more accurate results than the indirect/conventional way by creating a corresponding plaster model [22].…”

“…This sort of mobile or stationary surface imaging is non-invasive and is becoming an additional gold standard tool for documentation and planning, especially in craniofacial surgery [9–12]. Several mobile systems have shown to be a valid and reliable solution with a reasonable cost–benefit ratio alongside the established expensive stationary systems of the last decade due to ongoing technical developments [11, 13, 14].…”

Body size measuring techniques enabling stress-free growth monitoring of extreme preterm infants inside incubators: A systematic review

“…Some studies focused solely on accuracy and reliability of techniques, comparing these to a standard, routine technique, in most cases manual measurements with tape measure or calliper [33-35, 37, 38, 40-43, 45, 48-57]. In some studies, a high-resolution 3D scanner with high manufacturer-specification accuracy was used as reference for the 'true values', instead of manual measurements [49,57]. Studies validating commercially available 3D scanning devices for shape or growth analysis [32,35,36,39,44,46,47,54] did not perform any reference measurements to verify accuracy of scans, but relied on the manufacturers' claimed device accuracy or previous accuracy-validating studies.…”

Three-dimensional facial capture using a custom-built photogrammetry setup: Design, performance, and cost

“…Hybrid stereophotogrammetry solutions, which combine both techniques to achieve an optimal result 5 have been presented as well by 3dMD [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] . Even fairly low-cost solutions, such as David's SLS-2 24 , Fuel3D's Scanify 25,26 , and Microsoft's Kinect 27 have been investigated. Interestingly, some of the aforementioned studies use direct anthropometry (i.e.…”

“…Some studies attempt to minimize the effects of landmark identification error by prelabelling the facial surfaces 8,9,[11][12][13]15,17,18,23,[29][30][31][32] . Both tissue compressibility and facial pose variation can be circumvented by performing measurements on a mannequin head 8,11,12,15,17,18,20,23,24 , or plaster casts 13,25 . Other studies replace direct anthropometric measurements with (repeated) digital ones 18,[21][22][23]29 , use electromagnetic digitizers, coordinate measuring machines 13,15,30 , or other stereophotogrammetry devices 10,11,15,17,24,25,27,33 as the gold standard for comparison.…”