Three-dimensional anthropometry in periorbital region
阅读量：1272
DOI：10.21037/aes-20-99
发布日期：2021-03-15
作者：
Yongwei Guo ,Ming Lin
展开更多 '%20fill='white'%20fill-opacity='0.01'/%3e%3cmask%20id='mask0_3477_29692'%20style='mask-type:luminance'%20maskUnits='userSpaceOnUse'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20width='16'%20height='16'%3e%3crect%20id='&%23232;&%23146;&%23153;&%23231;&%23137;&%23136;_2'%20x='16'%20width='16'%20height='16'%20transform='rotate(90%2016%200)'%20fill='white'/%3e%3c/mask%3e%3cg%20mask='url(%23mask0_3477_29692)'%3e%3cpath%20id='&%23232;&%23183;&%23175;&%23229;&%23190;&%23132;'%20d='M14%205L8%2011L2%205'%20stroke='%23333333'%20stroke-width='1.5'%20stroke-linecap='round'%20stroke-linejoin='round'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
关键词
Three-dimensional (3D)
photogrammetry
periorbital soft tissue
eye
face
摘要
Abstract: Anthropometry can analyze the size, weight, and proportion of the human body objectively and quantitatively to supplement the visual assessment. Various non-invasive three-dimensional (3D) anthropometric techniques have been applied to assess soft tissues’ 3D morphology in the clinical practice. Among them, non-invasive stereophotogrammetry and laser scanning techniques are becoming increasingly popular in craniofacial surgery and plastic surgery. They have been applied for craniofacial growth estimation and morphometric investigation, genetic and acquired malformation diagnosis, as well as orthodontic or surgical treatment arrangement and outcome evaluation. However, few studies have been published for assessing the 3D morphology of soft tissues in the periorbital region. This paper reviews the studies involving the application and evaluation of the increasingly popular 3D photogrammetry in the periorbital region. These studies proposed detailed and standardized protocols for three-dimensionally assessing linear, curvilinear, angular, as well as volumetric measurements, and verified its high reliability in the periorbital region (even higher than caliper-derived direct measurements). In the future, reliable and accurate 3D imaging techniques, as well as standardized analyzing protocols, may find applications in following up morphological growth, preoperatively diagnosing and assessing patient periorbital conditions, planning surgical procedures, postoperatively evaluating treatment outcomes of a specific procedure, and comparing the differences in surgical results between various procedures, studies, as well as populations.
全文
基金
暂无基金信息
参考文献
1. Aldridge K, Boyadjiev SA, Capone GT, et al. Precision and error of three‐dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images. Am J Med Genet A 2005;138A:247-53.
2. Overschmidt B, Qureshi AA, Parikh RP, et al. A prospective evaluation of three-dimensional image simulation: patient-reported outcomes and mammometrics in primary breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;142:133e-44e.
3. Suszynski TM, Serra JM, Weissler JM, et al. Three-dimensional printing in rhinoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018;141:1383-5.
4. Talbert L, Kau CH, Christou T, et al. A 3D analysis of Caucasian and African American facial morphologies in a US population. J Orthod 2014;41:19-29.
5. Tremp M, di Summa PG, Schaakxs D, et al. Nipple reconstruction after autologous or expander breast reconstruction: a multimodal and 3-dimensional analysis. Aesthet Surg J 2017;37:179-87.
6. Baik HS, Jeon JM, Lee HJ. Facial soft-tissue analysis of Korean adults with normal occlusion using a 3-dimensional laser scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:759-66.
7. Kau CH, Hunter LM, Hingston EJ. A different look: 3-dimensional facial imaging of a child with Binder syndrome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:704-9.
8. Nord F, Ferjencik R, Seifert B, et al. The 3dMD photogrammetric photo system in cranio-maxillofacial surgery: validation of interexaminer variations and perceptions. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2015;43:1798-803.
9. Weinberg SM, Scott NM, Neiswanger K, et al. Digital three-dimensional photogrammetry: evaluation of anthropometric precision and accuracy using a Genex 3D camera system. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2004;41:507-18.
10. Knoops PGM, Beaumont CAA, Borghi A, et al. Comparison of three-dimensional scanner systems for craniomaxillofacial imaging. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2017;70:441-9.
11. Ramesh S, Johnson P, Sarcu D, et al. Gravity in midfacial aging: a 3-dimensional study. Aesthet Surg J 2021;41:143-51.
12. Koudelová J, Br??ek J, Cagáňová V, et al. Development of facial sexual dimorphism in children aged between 12 and 15 years: a three-dimensional longitudinal study. Orthod Craniofac Res 2015;18:175-84.
13. Lambros V. Facial aging: a 54-year, three-dimensional population study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020;145:921-8.
14. Gibelli D, Pucciarelli V, Cappella A, et al. Are portable stereophotogrammetric devices reliable in facial imaging? A validation study of VECTRA H1 device. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;76:1772-84.
15. Pucciarelli V, Bertoli S, Codari M, et al. Facial evaluation in holoprosencephaly. J Craniofac Surg 2017;28:e22-8.
16. Pucciarelli V, Bertoli S, Codari M, et al. The face of Glut1-DS patients: a 3D craniofacial morphometric analysis. Clin Anat 2017;30:644-52.
17. Gibelli D, De Angelis D, Poppa P, et al. An assessment of how facial mimicry can change facial morphology: implications for identification. J Forensic Sci 2017;62:405-10.
18. Gibelli D, Pucciarelli V, Poppa P, et al. Three-dimensional facial anatomy evaluation: Reliability of laser scanner consecutive scans procedure in comparison with stereophotogrammetry. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2018;46:1807-13.
19. Li Q, Zhang X, Li K, et al. Normative anthropometric analysis and aesthetic indication of the ocular region for young Chinese adults. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2016;254:189-97.
20. Jayaratne YS, Deutsch CK, Zwahlen RA. Normative findings for periocular anthropometric measurements among Chinese young adults in Hong Kong. Biomed Res Int 2013;2013:821428.
21. Jodeh DS, Curtis H, Cray JJ, et al. Anthropometric evaluation of periorbital region and facial projection using three-dimensional photogrammetry. J Craniofac Surg 2018;29:2017-20.
22. Guo Y, Schaub F, Mor JM, et al. A simple standardized three-dimensional anthropometry for the periocular region in a European Population. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020;145:514e-23e.
23. Guo Y, Rokohl AC, Schaub F, et al. Reliability of periocular anthropometry using three-dimensional digital stereophotogrammetry. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019;257:2517-31.
24. Kunjur J, Sabesan T, Ilankovan V. Anthropometric analysis of eyebrows and eyelids: an inter-racial study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2006;44:89-93.
25. Alex JC. Aesthetic considerations in the elevation of the eyebrow. Facial Plast Surg 2004;20:193-8.
26. Price KM, Gupta PK, Woodward JA, et al. Eyebrow and eyelid dimensions: an anthropometric analysis of African Americans and Caucasians. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124:615-23.
27. Kokubo K, Katori N, Hayashi K, et al. Evaluation of the eyebrow position after levator resection. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2017;70:85-90.
28. Rootman DB, Karlin J, Moore G, et al. The effect of ptosis surgery on brow position and the utility of preoperative phenylephrine testing. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg 2016;32:195-8.
29. Nakra T, Modjtahedi S, Vrcek I, et al. The effect of upper eyelid blepharoplasty on eyelid and brow position. Orbit 2016;35:324-7.
30. Schaaf H, Pons-Kuehnemann J, Malik CY, et al. Accuracy of three-dimensional photogrammetric images in non-synostotic cranial deformities. Neuropediatrics 2010;41:24-9.
31. Ulijaszek SJ, Kerr DA. Anthropometric measurement error and the assessment of nutritional status. Br J Nutr 1999;82:165-77.
32. Camison L, Bykowski M, Lee WW, et al. Validation of the Vectra H1 portable three-dimensional photogrammetry system for facial imaging. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;47:403-10.
33. Verhulst AC, Wesselius TS, Glas HH, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of a newly developed tool for volume measurements of the arm using 3D stereophotogrammetry. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2017;70:1753-9.
34. Dindaro?lu F, Kutlu P, Duran GS, et al. Accuracy and reliability of 3D stereophotogrammetry: a comparison to direct anthropometry and 2D photogrammetry. Angle Orthod 2016;86:487-94.
35. Lübbers HT, Medinger L, Kruse A, et al. Precision and accuracy of the 3dMD photogrammetric system in craniomaxillofacial application. J Craniofac Surg 2010;21:763-7.
36. de Menezes M, Rosati R, Ferrario VF, et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of a 3-dimensional stereophotogrammetric imaging system. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:2129-35.
37. Sawyer AR, See M, Nduka C. Assessment of the reproducibility of facial expressions with 3-D stereophotogrammetry. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;140:76-81.
38. Plooij JM, Swennen GR, Rangel FA, et al. Evaluation of reproducibility and reliability of 3D soft tissue analysis using 3D stereophotogrammetry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;38:267-73.
39. Guo Y, Hou X, Rokohl AC, et al. Reliability of periocular anthropometry: a comparison of direct, 2-dimensional, and 3-dimensional techniques. Dermatol Surg 2020;46:e23-31.
40. Andrade LM, Rodrigues da Silva AMB, Magri LV, et al. Repeatability study of angular and linear measurements on facial morphology analysis by means of stereophotogrammetry. J Craniofac Surg 2017;28:1107-11.
41. Weinberg SM. 3D stereophotogrammetry versus traditional craniofacial anthropometry: Comparing measurements from the 3D facial norms database to Farkas's North American norms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2019;155:693-701.
42. Hyer JN, Murta F, Juniat VAR, et al. Validating three-dimensional imaging for volumetric assessment of periorbital soft tissue. Orbit 2021;40:9-17.