A comparison between stereophotogrammetry and smartphone structured light technology for three-dimensional face scanning

• Published in: The Angle orthodontist Vol. 92; no. 3; pp. 358 - 363
• Main Authors: D‘Ettorre, Giorgio, Farronato, Marco, Candida, Ettore, Quinzi, Vincenzo, Grippaudo, Cristina
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Edward H. Angle Society of Orthodontists 01.05.2022
• Subjects: Face - diagnostic imaging; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Original; Photogrammetry; Reproducibility of Results; Smartphone; Technology; Orthodontics; Facial scan; Stereophotogrammetry
• ISSN: 0003-3219; 1945-7103; 1945-7103
• DOI: 10.2319/040921-290.1

To compare three-dimensional facial scans obtained by stereophotogrammetry with two different applications for smartphone supporting the TrueDepth system, a structured light technology. Facial scans of 40 different subjects were acquired with three different systems. The 3dMDtrio Stereophotogrammetry System (3dMD, Atlanta, Ga) was compared with a smartphone (iPhone Xs; Apple, Cupertino, Calif) equipped with the Bellus3D Face Application (version 1.6.11; Bellus3D Inc, Campbell, Calif) or Capture (version 1.2.5; Standard Cyborg Inc, San Francisco, Calif). Times of image acquisition and elaboration were recorded. The surface-to-surface deviation and the distance between 18 landmarks from 3dMD reference images to those acquired with Bellus3D or Capture were measured. Capturing and processing times with the smartphone applications were considerably longer than with the 3dMD system. The surface-to-surface deviation analysis between the Bellus3D and 3dMD showed an overlap percentage of 80.01% ± 5.92% and 56.62% ± 7.65% within the ranges of 1 mm and 0.5 mm discrepancy, respectively. Images from Capture showed an overlap percentage of 81.40% ± 9.59% and 56.45% ± 11.62% within the ranges of 1 mm and 0.5 mm, respectively. The face image acquisition with the 3dMD device is fast and accurate, but bulky and expensive. The new smartphone applications combined with the TrueDepth sensors show promising results. They need more accuracy from the operator and more compliance from the patient because of the increased acquisition time. Their greatest advantages are related to cost and portability.