Cargando…
Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review
Aim: Three-dimensional facial imaging systems are a useful tool that is gradually replacing two-dimensional imaging and traditional anthropometry with calipers. In this varied and growing landscape of new devices, Canfield (Canfield Scientific, Parsippany, NJ, USA) has proposed a series of static an...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9318949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35886670 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148820 |
_version_ | 1784755428975968256 |
---|---|
author | De Stefani, Alberto Barone, Martina Hatami Alamdari, Sam Barjami, Arjola Baciliero, Ugo Apolloni, Federico Gracco, Antonio Bruno, Giovanni |
author_facet | De Stefani, Alberto Barone, Martina Hatami Alamdari, Sam Barjami, Arjola Baciliero, Ugo Apolloni, Federico Gracco, Antonio Bruno, Giovanni |
author_sort | De Stefani, Alberto |
collection | PubMed |
description | Aim: Three-dimensional facial imaging systems are a useful tool that is gradually replacing two-dimensional imaging and traditional anthropometry with calipers. In this varied and growing landscape of new devices, Canfield (Canfield Scientific, Parsippany, NJ, USA) has proposed a series of static and portable 3D imaging systems. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature regarding the validation of Canfield’s Vectra imaging systems. Materials and Methods: A search strategy was developed on electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus by using specific keywords. After the study selection phase, a total of 10 articles were included in the present review. Results: A total of 10 articles were finally included in the present review. For six articles, we conducted a validation of the Vectra static devices, focusing especially on the Vectra M5, Vectra M3 and Vectra XT. For four articles, we validated the Vectra H1 portable system. Conclusions: All of the reviewed articles concluded that Canfield’s Vectra 3D imaging systems are capable of capturing accurate and reproducible stereophotogrammetric images. Minor errors were reported, particularly in the acquisition of the perioral region, but all the evaluated devices are considered to be valid and accurate tools for clinicians. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9318949 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93189492022-07-27 Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review De Stefani, Alberto Barone, Martina Hatami Alamdari, Sam Barjami, Arjola Baciliero, Ugo Apolloni, Federico Gracco, Antonio Bruno, Giovanni Int J Environ Res Public Health Review Aim: Three-dimensional facial imaging systems are a useful tool that is gradually replacing two-dimensional imaging and traditional anthropometry with calipers. In this varied and growing landscape of new devices, Canfield (Canfield Scientific, Parsippany, NJ, USA) has proposed a series of static and portable 3D imaging systems. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature regarding the validation of Canfield’s Vectra imaging systems. Materials and Methods: A search strategy was developed on electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus by using specific keywords. After the study selection phase, a total of 10 articles were included in the present review. Results: A total of 10 articles were finally included in the present review. For six articles, we conducted a validation of the Vectra static devices, focusing especially on the Vectra M5, Vectra M3 and Vectra XT. For four articles, we validated the Vectra H1 portable system. Conclusions: All of the reviewed articles concluded that Canfield’s Vectra 3D imaging systems are capable of capturing accurate and reproducible stereophotogrammetric images. Minor errors were reported, particularly in the acquisition of the perioral region, but all the evaluated devices are considered to be valid and accurate tools for clinicians. MDPI 2022-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9318949/ /pubmed/35886670 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148820 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review De Stefani, Alberto Barone, Martina Hatami Alamdari, Sam Barjami, Arjola Baciliero, Ugo Apolloni, Federico Gracco, Antonio Bruno, Giovanni Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title | Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title_full | Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title_fullStr | Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title_short | Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review |
title_sort | validation of vectra 3d imaging systems: a review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9318949/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35886670 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19148820 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT destefanialberto validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT baronemartina validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT hatamialamdarisam validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT barjamiarjola validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT bacilierougo validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT apollonifederico validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT graccoantonio validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview AT brunogiovanni validationofvectra3dimagingsystemsareview |