Summary
Background
The incidence of facial skin cancer increases worldwide, resulting in more surgical
resections and reconstructions. Reconstructive surgery aims to approach a normal facial
anatomy to optimize the quality of life. Objective automated assessment of the esthetic
outcome of facial reconstructions could provide feedback for the improvement of surgical
techniques and preoperative patient expectation management.
Objective
This systematic literature review aimed to assess whether modern technologies can
create automated objective measurements of surgical and non-surgical facial interventions
outcomes using 3D surface imaging technology.
Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science,
and Cochrane on May 19, 2021. All English literature was collected on surgical and
non-surgical invasive facial interventions in which 3D surface imaging technology
was used for objective automated assessment of outcomes.
Results
Fourteen articles were included in the systematic review. 3D surface imaging technology
and automated assessment techniques were found for skin malignancy, cleft lip repair,
rhinoplasty, orthognathic surgery, and injectables. Ten 3D surface imaging technology
hardware systems and 12 software systems were described. Four studies compared 3D
surface imaging techniques to conventional methods. Ten studies used 3D surface imaging
techniques for the evaluation of the surgical outcome, without comparison to 2D photography,
validated scores, or a panel. Two studies validated the hardware system.
Conclusion
This systematic literature review shows that 3D surface imaging technology has the
potential for automated objective assessment of facial intervention outcomes. Future
studies are necessary to study and validate these tools for standard clinical use
in patients with facial interventions.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- It's time for "keratinocyte carcinoma" to replace the term "nonmelanoma skin cancer".J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015; 72: 186-187
- A systematic review of worldwide incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer.Br J Dermatol. 2012; 166: 1069-1080
- Updates on the management of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC).Healthcare (Basel). 2017; : 5
- Advances in the understanding of skin cancer: ultraviolet radiation, mutations, and antisense oligonucleotides as anticancer drugs.Molecules. 2019; : 24
- Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries.CA Cancer J Clin. 2021; 71: 209-249
- A retrospective review of reconstructive options and outcomes of 202 cases large facial mohs micrographic surgical defects, based on the aesthetic unit involved.J Cutan Med Surg. 2015; 19: 580-587
- Detailed head localization and incidence of skin cancers.Sci Rep. 2021; 11: 12391
- The skin cancer quality of life impact tool (SCQOLIT): a validated health-related quality of life questionnaire for non-metastatic skin cancers.J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2013; 27: 1109-1113
- FACE-Q Skin Cancer Module for measuring patient-reported outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery.Br J Dermatol. 2018; 179: 88-94
- Pretty pleases: the effects of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help.J Exp Soc Psychol. 1976; 12: 409-415
- The impact of nasal reconstruction following tumour resection on psychosocial functioning, a clinical-empirical exploration.Psychooncology. 2009; 18: 747-752
- Patient experiences and outcomes following facial skin cancer surgery: a qualitative study.Australas J Dermatol. 2016; 57: e100-e104
- Beauty in mind: the effects of physical attractiveness on psychological well-being and distress.J Happiness Stud. 2016; 17: 1313-1325
- What is beautiful is good.J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972; 24: 285-290
- Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review.Psychol Bull. 2000; 126: 390-423
- Insights into patient and clinician concerns about scar appearance: semiquantitative structured surveys.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009; 124: 256-265
- Measuring and managing patient expectations for breast reconstruction: impact on quality of life and patient satisfaction.Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2012; 12: 149-158
- 3D digital stereophotogrammetry: a practical guide to facial image acquisition.Head Face Med. 2010; 6: 18
- Update in three-dimensional imaging in facial plastic surgery.Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004; 12: 327-331
- Three-dimensional stereophotogrammetry in the evaluation of craniosynostosis: current and potential use cases.J Craniofac Surg. 2021; (Publish Ahead of Print)
- Passive stereophotogrammetry and structured light scanning for 3-dimensional imaging in dermatologic surgery.Dermatol Surg. 2020; 46: 855-856
- Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.PLoS Med. 2009; 6e1000097
- The Cochrane collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.Bmj. 2011; 343: d5928
- Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS).BMJ Open. 2016; 6e011458
Quality assessment tool for before-after (pre-post) studies with no control group.
G.A. Wells BS, D. O'Connell, J. Peterson, V. Welch, M. Losos, P. Tugwell. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses.
- Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?.Mil Med Res. 2020; 7: 7
- Upper lip asymmetry perception using three-dimensional anthropometry in patients with unilateral cleft lip deformity.J Craniofac Surg. 2011; 22: 2080-2083
- Orthognathic Surgery and Rhinoplasty: simultaneous or Staged?.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018; 141: 322-329
- Lower lateral cartilage repositioning: objective analysis using 3-dimensional imaging.JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2014; 16: 261-267
- A preliminary three-dimensional analysis of nasal aesthetics following Le Fort I advancement in patients with cleft lip and palate.J Craniofac Surg. 2015; 26: e629-ee33
- Novel computer vision analysis of nasal shape in children with unilateral cleft lip.J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 46: 35-43
- Measuring symmetry in children with cleft lip. Part 2: quantification of nasolabial symmetry before and after cleft lip repair.Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2016; 53: 705-713
- Nasolabial morphologic changes after a le fort i osteotomy: a three-dimensional anthropometric study.J Craniofac Surg. 2010; 21: 1089-1095
- Computer aided three-dimensional analysis of nostril forms: application in normal and operated cleft lip patients.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 1999; 27: 345-353
- M-shaped auricular cartilage as modified septal extension graft: a study by three-dimensional anthropometric analysis in asian rhinoplasty.Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021;
- 3D photogrammetric analysis of the nasal tip projection and derotation based on the nasal tip quadripod concept.Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2017; 41: 608-617
- Subjective and objective appearance of head and neck cancer patients following microsurgical reconstruction and associated quality of life-A cross-sectional study.J Cranio-MaxilloFac Surg. 2018; 46: 1275-1284
- A nasolabial fold reset technique for enhancing midface lifts in facial reanimation: three-dimensional volumetric analysis.J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 48: 162-169
- Different injection patterns of incobotulinumtoxinA for crow's feet: a split-face comparative study.J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;
- Three-dimensional laser scanner evaluation of facial soft tissue changes after LeFort I advancement and rhinoplasty surgery: patients with cleft lip and palate vs patients with nonclefted maxillary retrognathic dysplasia (control group).Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014; 117: 416-423
- 3D photogrammetric analysis in hump nose correction based on nasal tip projection without dorsal augmentation in Asian rhinoplasty.J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 48: 792-799
- Automated face extraction and normalization of 3D Mesh Data.Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2014; 2014: 750-753
- Defining and implementing value-based health care: a strategic framework.Acad Med. 2020; 95: 682-685
- Lip height and lip width after extended Mohler unilateral cleft lip repair.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003; 111 (discussion 24-6): 17-23
- Rating nasolabial appearance on three-dimensional images in cleft lip and palate: a comparison with standard photographs.Eur J Orthod. 2016; 38: 197-201
- The evolution of photography and three-dimensional imaging in plastic surgery.Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017; 139: 761-769
- A comparative study of three-dimensional simulation in nonsurgical rhinoplasty with hyaluronic acid fillers.Ann Plast Surg. 2021;
- One year postoperative hard-and soft tissue volumetric changes after a BSSO mandibular advancement.Int J Comput Assisted Radiol Surg. 2011; 6: S217
- Growth and aging of facial soft tissues: a computerized three-dimensional mesh diagram analysis.Clin Anat. 2003; 16: 420-433
- Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology surface changes in untreated children from 12 to 14 years of age.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 134: 751-760
- New method for analysis of facial growth in a pediatric reconstructed mandible.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139: e285-ee90
- 3D analysis of facial morphology.Am J Med Genet A. 2004; 126A: 339-348
- Shape-based classification of 3D facial data to support 22q11.2DS craniofacial research.J Digit Imaging. 2012; 25: 400-408
- Assessment of facial tissue expansion with three-dimensional digitizer scanning.J Craniofac Surg. 2002; 13: 687-692
- 2D and 3D analysis methods of facial asymmetry in comparison.J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2014; 42: e327-e334
- Nasolabial symmetry and esthetics in cleft lip and palate: analysis of 3D facial images.Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19: 1833-1842
- Improved facial outcome assessment using a 3D anthropometric mask.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 41: 324-330
- Anthropometric accuracy of three-dimensional average faces compared to conventional facial measurements.Sci Rep. 2021; 11: 12254
Article info
Publication history
Published online: June 24, 2022
Accepted:
June 21,
2022
Received:
February 5,
2022
Identification
Copyright
© 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.
