Three-Dimensional versus Two-Dimensional Evaluations of Cranial Asymmetry in Deformational Plagiocephaly Using a Three-Dimensional Scanner

• Published in: Children (Basel) Vol. 9; no. 6; p. 788
• Main Authors: Kato, Risa, Nagano, Nobuhiko, Hashimoto, Shin, Saito, Katsuya, Miyabayashi, Hiroshi, Noto, Takanori, Morioka, Ichiro
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 27.05.2022; MDPI
• Subjects: anterior symmetry ratio; Asymmetry; Babies; Care and treatment; cranial asymmetry; Craniofacial abnormalities; Diagnosis; head deformity; Health aspects; Infants; Magnetic resonance imaging; Pediatric research; Pediatrics; plagiocephaly; posterior symmetry ratio; Scanners; Scanning devices; Symmetry; Symmetry (Biology); Three dimensional imaging; Tomography; United States; Japan; Luxembourg; anterior symmetry ratio; posterior symmetry ratio; head deformity; cranial asymmetry; plagiocephaly
• DOI: 10.3390/children9060788
• ISSN: 2227-9067

This study aimed to assess the measurement precision of a three-dimensional (3D) scanner that detects the geometric shape as surface data and to investigate the differences between two-dimensional (2D) and 3D evaluations in infants with deformational plagiocephaly. Using the 3D scanner that can perform both 2D and 3D evaluations, we calculated cranial asymmetry (CA) for the 2D evaluation, and the anterior symmetry ratio (ASR) and posterior symmetry ratio (PSR) for the 3D evaluation. Intra- and inter-examiner precision analyses revealed that the coefficients of the variation measurements were extremely low (<1%) for all variables, except CA (5%). In 530 infants, the coincidence rate of CA severity by the 2D evaluation and the 3D evaluation was 83.4%. A disagreement on severity was found between 2D and 3D evaluations in 88 infants (16.6%): 68 infants (12.8%) were assessed as severe by 2D evaluation and mild by the 3D evaluation, while 20 infants (3.8%) were evaluated as mild by 2D and severe by 3D evaluation. Overall, the 2D evaluation identified more infants as severe than the 3D evaluation. The 3D evaluation proved more precise than the 2D evaluation. We found that approximately one in six infants differed in severity between 2D and 3D evaluations.