Cargando…

Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment

Three-dimensional (3D) photography is becoming widely used in plastic surgery. It provides an accurate and reproducible record of the facial surface anatomy and could be a versatile tool for treatment planning and assessment. However, the existing software tools available for the assessment of 3D fa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Matthews, Harold S., Burge, Jonathan A., Verhelst, Pieter-Jan R., Politis, Constantinus, Claes, Peter D., Penington, Anthony J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7605870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33154878
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002847
_version_ 1783604397920485376
author Matthews, Harold S.
Burge, Jonathan A.
Verhelst, Pieter-Jan R.
Politis, Constantinus
Claes, Peter D.
Penington, Anthony J.
author_facet Matthews, Harold S.
Burge, Jonathan A.
Verhelst, Pieter-Jan R.
Politis, Constantinus
Claes, Peter D.
Penington, Anthony J.
author_sort Matthews, Harold S.
collection PubMed
description Three-dimensional (3D) photography is becoming widely used in plastic surgery. It provides an accurate and reproducible record of the facial surface anatomy and could be a versatile tool for treatment planning and assessment. However, the existing software tools available for the assessment of 3D facial imaging often give highly misleading results. The goal of this special topic article is to give clinicians an insight into methods of 3D image assessment and explain the reasons why results may be misleading. We point toward the advantages of an alternative approach using “nonrigid surface registration” for the comparison of pre- and postsurgical images. This approach is compared with the regular rigid surface registration, and this is illustrated by the assessment of a child with Crouzon syndrome before and after LeFort III osteotomy and distraction. Findings of the standard method imply that changes have occurred that are anatomically not possible, whereas the alternative approach indicates realistic changes. Furthermore, we demonstrate an exciting capacity of 3D image analysis to construct reference populations of normal head size and shape. These can be used to assess the parts of the head that are normal and abnormal pre- and posttreatment of the same child. We conclude that, while 3D image analysis has great potential in surgical assessment, existing software does not always give an adequate assessment. Collaboration among surgeons and engineering and computer science specialists should be encouraged. This way, more comprehensive and accurate techniques in patient assessment and surgical planning can be developed and applied in clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7605870
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76058702020-11-04 Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment Matthews, Harold S. Burge, Jonathan A. Verhelst, Pieter-Jan R. Politis, Constantinus Claes, Peter D. Penington, Anthony J. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Special Topic Three-dimensional (3D) photography is becoming widely used in plastic surgery. It provides an accurate and reproducible record of the facial surface anatomy and could be a versatile tool for treatment planning and assessment. However, the existing software tools available for the assessment of 3D facial imaging often give highly misleading results. The goal of this special topic article is to give clinicians an insight into methods of 3D image assessment and explain the reasons why results may be misleading. We point toward the advantages of an alternative approach using “nonrigid surface registration” for the comparison of pre- and postsurgical images. This approach is compared with the regular rigid surface registration, and this is illustrated by the assessment of a child with Crouzon syndrome before and after LeFort III osteotomy and distraction. Findings of the standard method imply that changes have occurred that are anatomically not possible, whereas the alternative approach indicates realistic changes. Furthermore, we demonstrate an exciting capacity of 3D image analysis to construct reference populations of normal head size and shape. These can be used to assess the parts of the head that are normal and abnormal pre- and posttreatment of the same child. We conclude that, while 3D image analysis has great potential in surgical assessment, existing software does not always give an adequate assessment. Collaboration among surgeons and engineering and computer science specialists should be encouraged. This way, more comprehensive and accurate techniques in patient assessment and surgical planning can be developed and applied in clinical practice. Wolters Kluwer Health 2020-05-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7605870/ /pubmed/33154878 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002847 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Special Topic
Matthews, Harold S.
Burge, Jonathan A.
Verhelst, Pieter-Jan R.
Politis, Constantinus
Claes, Peter D.
Penington, Anthony J.
Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title_full Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title_fullStr Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title_short Pitfalls and Promise of 3-dimensional Image Comparison for Craniofacial Surgical Assessment
title_sort pitfalls and promise of 3-dimensional image comparison for craniofacial surgical assessment
topic Special Topic
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7605870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33154878
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002847
work_keys_str_mv AT matthewsharolds pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment
AT burgejonathana pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment
AT verhelstpieterjanr pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment
AT politisconstantinus pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment
AT claespeterd pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment
AT peningtonanthonyj pitfallsandpromiseof3dimensionalimagecomparisonforcraniofacialsurgicalassessment