Validation of low-cost mobile phone applications and comparison with professional imaging systems for three-dimensional facial imaging: A pilot study

• Published in: Journal of dentistry Vol. 137; p. 104676
• Main Authors: Loy, Richmond Chang Hoe, Liew, Melvin Kang Ming, Yong, Chee Weng, Wong, Raymond Chung Wen
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.10.2023
• Subjects: 3D imaging; 3D Photography; 3D surface scanning; Craniofacial surgery; Maxillofacial surgery; 3D Photography; 3D imaging; 3D surface scanning; Craniofacial surgery; Maxillofacial surgery
• ISSN: 0300-5712; 1879-176X; 1879-176X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2023.104676

The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracies of three-dimensional (3D) facial scanning mobile phone applications as compared to professional 3D facial imaging systems. A manikin head model was used as the subject for comparing six 3D facial imaging systems which comprised three professional 3D scanners (3dMDface, Artec Eva and Vectra H2) and three mobile phone applications (Bellus3D, ScandyPro and Hedges). For each system, five scans were taken to analyse (1) linear accuracy using 9 measurements (2) global and (3) regional 3D accuracy of the scanned surface by root mean square (RMS) and colour map analysis. Another set of five scans was repeated by a second operator to evaluate the inter-operator reproducibility for each system. All the facial imaging systems had absolute errors lesser than 1.0 mm for the linear measurements. The technical error of measurement (TEM) for inter-examiner and intra-examiner linear measurements were within acceptable limits. Artec Eva, Vectra H2 and Scandy Pro had poor global 3D trueness (RMS > 1.0 mm) but good 3D regional trueness (RMS < 1.0 mm). 3dMDface, Bellus3D Face App and Heges had good global and regional 3D trueness. All the facial imaging systems had good global and regional 3D precision and reproducibility (RMS < 1.0 mm). This study demonstrated that mobile phone 3D scanning applications had comparable trueness, precision and reproducibility to professional systems. Colour map analysis supplemented the use of the RMS value to demonstrate facial regions of significant deviation. Clinicians should also consider the specific area or region of inaccuracies for each system to determine whether the chosen system is appropriate for the clinical condition or procedure. Mobile phone 3D facial imaging applications may be as accurate as 3D professional facial scanning systems for craniomaxillofacial purposes. However, the choice of the system may vary depending on the specific area of interest.