Comparison of three-dimensional surface-imaging systems

SummaryBackgroundIn recent decades, three-dimensional (3D) surface-imaging technologies have gained popularity worldwide, but because most published articles that mention them are technical, clinicians often have difficulties gaining a proper understanding of them. This article aims to provide the reader with relevant information on 3D surface-imaging systems. In it, we compare the most recent technologies to reveal their differences.MethodsWe have accessed five international companies with the latest technologies in 3D surface-imaging systems: 3dMD, Axisthree, Canfield, Crisalix and Dimensional Imaging (Di3D; in alphabetical order). We evaluated their technical equipment, independent validation studies and corporate backgrounds.ResultsThe fastest capturing devices are the 3dMD and Di3D systems, capable of capturing images within 1.5 and 1 ms, respectively. All companies provide software for tissue modifications. Additionally, 3dMD, Canfield and Di3D can fuse computed tomography (CT)/cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images into their 3D surface-imaging data. 3dMD and Di3D provide 4D capture systems, which allow capturing the movement of a 3D surface over time. Crisalix greatly differs from the other four systems as it is purely web based and realised via cloud computing.Conclusion3D surface-imaging systems are becoming important in today's plastic surgical set-ups, taking surgeons to a new level of communication with patients, surgical planning and outcome evaluation. Technologies used in 3D surface-imaging systems and their intended field of application vary within the companies evaluated. Potential users should define their requirements and assignment of 3D surface-imaging systems in their clinical as research environment before making the final decision for purchase.