Validation of Vectra 3D Imaging Systems: A Review

Alberto De Stefani, Martina Barone, Sam Hatami Alamdari, Arjola Barjami, Ugo Baciliero, Federico Apolloni, Antonio Gracco and Giovanni Bruno
Additional contact information
Alberto De Stefani: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Martina Barone: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Sam Hatami Alamdari: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Arjola Barjami: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Ugo Baciliero: Maxillofacial Surgery Complex Unit of San Bortolo Hospital of Vicenza, 36100 Vicenza, Italy
Federico Apolloni: Maxillofacial Surgery Complex Unit of San Bortolo Hospital of Vicenza, 36100 Vicenza, Italy
Antonio Gracco: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy
Giovanni Bruno: Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, University of Padova, 35100 Padova, Italy

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 14, 1-13

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: Vectra; Vectra 3D imaging systems; 3D imaging; stereophotogrammetry (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8820/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8820/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8820-:d:867178

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().