International Journal of Legal Medicine

, Volume 121, Issue 6, pp 469–475 | Cite as

Assessment of the accuracy of three-dimensional manual craniofacial reconstruction: a series of 25 controlled cases

  • Gérald Quatrehomme
  • Thierry Balaguer
  • Pascal Staccini
  • Véronique Alunni-Perret
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of this work was to estimate the accuracy of craniofacial reconstruction (CFR), from a series of 25 controlled cases. Three protocols of blind CFRs (exhibiting an increasing complexity from A to C) were assessed in this paper, allowing comparison of the CFR with the actual face of the deceased. The whole results showed that an excellent, or good, to middle resemblance (between the blind CFR and the actual face of the subject) was reached in 9 out of 25 cases, but the success gradually increased from the A to the C protocol of CFR, reaching six cases out of eight in the latter. Statistical comparison of measurements (between the blind CFR and the actual face) was also achieved, revealing that some anthropological distances were constantly underestimated or overestimated. This experiment shows that a thorough anthropological, odontological, and X-ray analysis is indispensable before performing a CFR, and these encouraging results justify further efforts of research in this field.

Keywords

Cranio-facial reconstruction Facial reconstruction Facial approximation Forensic Autopsy Anthropology Skull 

References

  1. 1.
    Olze A, Bilang D, Schmidt S, Wernecke KD, Geserick G, Schmeling A (2005) Validation of common classification systems for assessing the mineralization of third molars. Int J Legal Med 119:22–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Muhler M, Schulz R, Schmidt S, Schmeling A, Reisinger W (2006) The influence of slice thickness on assessment of clavicle ossification in forensic age diagnostics. Int J Legal Med 120:15–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schmeling A, Schulz R, Danner B, Rosing FW (2006) The impact of economic progress and modernization in medicine on the ossification of hand and wrist. Int J Legal Med 120:121–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schmeling A, Baumann U, Wernecke KD, Reisinger W (2006) Reference data for the Thiemann-Nitz method of assessing skeletal age for the purpose of forensic age estimation. Int J Legal Med 120:1–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schulz R, Muhler M, Mutze S, Schmidt S, Reisinger W, Schmeling A (2005) Studies on the time frame for ossification of the medial epiphysis of the clavicle as revealed by CT scans. Int J Legal Med 119:142–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Quatrehomme G, Cotin S, Alunni V, Garidel Y, Grévin G, Bailet P, Ollier A, Ayache N (1999) La superposition, la restauration et la reconstruction faciales: une aide à l’identification médico-légale. Journal de Médecine Légale Droit Médical 42:11–22Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Quatrehomme G, Subsol G (2005) Classical non-computer-assisted craniofacial reconstruction. In: Clement JG, Marks MK (eds) Computer graphic facial recontruction. Elsevier, Academic, Amsterdam, pp 15–32Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aulsebrook WA, Becker PJ, İşcan MY (1996) Facial soft-tissue thicknesses in the adult male Zulu. Forensic Sci Int 79:83–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Greef S, Willems G (2005) Three-dimensional cranio-facial reconstruction in forensic identification: latest progress and new tendencies in the 21st century. J Forensic Sci 50:12–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Quatrehomme G, İşcan MY (2000) Computerized facial reconstruction. In: Siegel JA, Saukko PJ, Knupfer GC (eds) Encyclopedia of forensic sciences. Academic, San Diego, pp 773–779Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pötsch L, Herz U, Leithoff H, Urban R, Rittner Ch (1994) Zur postmortalen Gesichtsrekonstruktion. Arbeitskonzept einer schnellen Identifizierungsmöglichkeit. Rechtsmedizin 4:61–68Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moss JP, Linney AD, Grindrod SR, Arridge SR, Clifton JS (1987) Three-dimensional visualization of the face and skull using computerized tomography and laser scanning techniques. Eur J Orthod 9:247–253PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Quatrehomme G, Cotin S, Subsol G, Delingette H, Garidel Y, Grévin G, Fridrich M, Bailet P, Ollier A (1997) A fully three-dimensional method for facial reconstruction based on deformable models. J Forensic Sci 42:647–650Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoshino M, Matsuda H, Kubota S, Imaizumi K, Miyasaka S (2000) Computer-assisted facial image identification system using a 3-D physiognomic range finder. Forensic Sci Int 109:225–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nelson LA, Michael SD (1998) The application of volume deformation to three-dimensional facial reconstruction: a comparison with previous techniques. Forensic Sci Int 94:167–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miyasaka S, Yoshino M, Imaizumi K, Seta S (1995) The computer-aided facial reconstruction system. Forensic Sci Int 74:155–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Evenhouse R, Rasmussen M, Sadler L (1992) Computer-aided forensic facial reconstruction. J Biocommun 19:22–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vanezis P, Vanezis M, McCombe T, Niblett T (2000) Facial reconstruction using 3-D computer graphics. Forensic Sci Int 108:81–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Subsol G, Quatrehomme G (2005) Automatic 3D facial reconstruction by featured-based registration of a reference head. In: Clement JG, Marks MK (eds) Computer graphic facial recontruction. Elsevier, Academic, Amsterdam, pp 79–101Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Clement JG, Marks MK (2005) Computer graphic facial recontruction. Elsevier, Academic, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vandermeulen D, Claes P, Loeckx D, De Greef S, Willems G, Suetens P (2006) Computerized craniofacial reconstruction using CT-derived implicit surface representations. Forensic Sci Int 159(Suppl 1):164–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Snow CC, Gatliff BP, McWilliams KR (1970) Reconstruction of facial features from the skull: an evaluation of its usefulness in forensic anthropology. Am J Phys Anrthropol 33:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gatliff BP, Snow CC (1979) From skull to visage. J Biocommun 6:27–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stewart TD (1954) Evaluation of evidence from the skeleton. In: Gradwohl RBH (ed) Legal medicine. Mosby, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stephan CN (2003) Anthropological facial reconstruction-recognizing the fallacies, ‘unembracing’ the errors, and realizing method limits. Sci Justice 43:193–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Angle EH, Die Okklusionsanomalien der Zähne, 2, Aufl. Meusser, Berlin. Cited by Rakosi Th and Irmtrud J, Atlas de Médecine Dentaire. Orthopédie dentofaciale, Diagnostic, Paris, Médecine Sciences Flammarion, p. 46Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moore CE (1981) A problem in human variation: the facial tissue thicknesses of Caucasoids, Negroids, and Mongoloids. Ph.D. Dissertation. The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New MexicoGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rhine JS, Moore CE, Weston JT (eds) (1982) Facial reproduction : tables of facial tissue thicknesses of American Caucasoids in forensic anthropology. Maxwell Museum Technical Series1, Albuquerque, New MexicoGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Krogman WM, İşcan MY (1986) The human skeleton in forensic medicine. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, IllGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Macho GA (1986) An appraisal of plastic reconstruction of the external nose. J Forensic Sci 31:1391–1403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Quatrehomme G (2000) Reconstruction faciale: intérêt anthropologique et médico-légal. Ph.D., University of Bordeaux I (France), Faculty of SciencesGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yoshino M, Seta S (2000) Skull-photo superimposition. In: Siegel JA, Saukko PJ, Knupfer GC (eds) Encyclopedia of forensic sciences. Academic, San Diego, pp 807–815Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Aulsebrook WA (2000) Facial tissue thickness in facial reconstruction. In: Siegel JA, Saukko PJ, Knupfer GC (eds) Encyclopedia of forensic sciences. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 779–788Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rogers SL (1987) Personal identification from human remains. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, IllGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    George RM (1987) The lateral craniographic method of facial reconstruction. J Forensic Sci 32:1305–1330Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Quatrehomme G, Garidel Y, Grévin G, Liao ZG, Bailet P, Ollier A (1995) Method for identifying putrefied corpses by facial casting. Forensic Sci Int 74:115–124PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Quatrehomme G, Garidel Y, Grévin G, Liao ZG, Bailet P, Boublenza A, Ollier A (1996) Facial casting as a method to help identify severely disfigured corpses. J Forensic Sci 41:518–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rakosi T (1982) An atlas and manual of cephalometric radiography. Wolfe Medical Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Aulsebrook WA, İşcan MY, Slabbert JH, Becker P (1995) Superimposition and reconstruction in forensic facial identification: a survey. Forensic Sci Int 75:101–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fedosyutkin BA, Nainys JV (1993) The relationship of skull morphology to facial features. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 199–213Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Puech PF (1995) Portrait of the ‘Temple Child’, a missing-link in the case of Louis XVII. Int J Legal Med 107:209–212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hill B, McLeod I, Crothers A (1996) Rebuilding the face of George Buchanan (1506–1582). J Audiov Media Med 19:11–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gerasimov MM (1949) Principles of reconstruction of the face on the skull. Moscow, Nauka [in Russian language]. Quoted by: Fedosyutkin BA, Nainys JV. The relationship of skull morphology to facial features. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 199–213Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Gerasimov MM (1955) Reconstruction of the face on the skull. Moscow, Nauka [in Russian language]. Quoted by: Fedosyutkin BA, Nainys JV. The relationship of skull morphology to facial features. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 199–213Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gerasimov MM (1971) The face finder. Lippincott, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Vanezis P, Blowes RW, Linney AD, Tan AC, Richards R, Neave R (1989) Application of 3-D computer graphics for facial reconstruction and comparison with sculpting techniques. Forensic Sci Int 42:69–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Vanezis M, Vanezis P (2000) Cranio-facial reconstruction in forensic identification-historical development and a review of current practice. Med Sci Law 40:197–205PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Shahrom AW, Vanezis P, Chapman RC, Gonzales A, Blenkinsop C, Rossi ML (1996) Techniques in facial identification: computer-aided facial reconstruction using a laser scanner and video superimposition. Int J Legal Med 108:194–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Claes P, Vandermeulen D, De Greef S, Willems G, Suetens P (2006) Craniofacial reconstruction using a combined statistical model of face shape and soft tissue depths: methodology and validation. Forensic Sci Int 159 (Suppl 1):147–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Krogman WM (1946) The reconstruction of the living head from the skull. FBI Law Enforc Bull 15:11–18Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Ilan E (1964) Identifying skeletal remains. Int Crim Police 175:42–45Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Suzuki T (1973) Reconstruction of a skull. Int Crim Police Rev 264:76–80Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Rathbun TA (1984) Personal identification: facial reproductions. In: Rathbun TA, Buikstra JE (eds) Human identification: case studies in forensic anthropology. Charles C Thomas, Springfield, Ill, pp 347–356Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gerasimov MM (1968) Ich suchte Gesichter. C. Bertelsmann, Gütersloh. Quoted by: Helmer RP, Röhricht S, Petersen D, Möhr F. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 229–246Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Stephan CN (2002) Do resemblance ratings measure the accuracy of facial approximations? J Forensic Sci 47:239–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Stephan CN, Arthur RS (2006) Assessing facial approximation accuracy: how do resemblance ratings of disparate faces compare to recognition tests? Forensic Sci Int 159 (Suppl 1):159–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Stephan CN, Henneberg M (2001) Building faces from dry skulls: are they recognized above chance rates? J Forensic Sci 46:432–440PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Suk V (1935) Fallacies on anthropological identifications and reconstructions. A critique based on anatomical dissections, vol. 207. Publications of the Faculty of Science University of Masaryk, Prague pp 1–18Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Brues AM (1958) Identification of skeletal remains. J Crim Law Criminol Police Sci 48:551–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kerley ER (1977) Forensic anthropology in forensic medicine. In: Tedeschi CD, Eckert WG, Tedeschi LG (eds) Physical Trauma, Vol. II. WB Saunders, Philadelphia, pp. 1101–1115Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    George RM (1993) Anatomical and artistic guidelines for forensic facial reconstruction. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 215–227Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Haglund WD (1998) Forensic “art” in human identification. In: Clement JG, Ranson DL (eds) Craniofacial identification in forensic medicine. Arnold, London, pp 235–243Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Haglund WD, Reay DT (1991) Use of facial approximation techniques in identification of Green River serial murder victims. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 12:132–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Stephan CN, Henneberg M (2006) Recognition by forensic facial approximation: case specific examples and empirical tests. Forensic Sci Int 156:182–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Helmer RP, Röhricht S, Petersen D, Möhr F (1993) Assessment of the reliability of facial reconstruction. In: İşcan MY, Helmer RP (eds) Forensic analysis of the skull. Wiley-Liss, New York, pp 229–246Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rhine JS, Campbell HR (1980) Thickness of facial tissues in American blacks. J Forensic Sci 25:847–858PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Domaracki M, Stephan CN (2006) Facial soft tissue thicknesses in Australian adult cadavers. J Forensic Sci 51:5–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Phillips VM, Smuts NA (1996) Facial reconstruction: utilization of computerized tomography to measure facial tissue thickness in a mixed racial population. Forensic Sci Int 83:51–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    De Greef S, Claes P, Mollemans W, Loubele M, Vandermeulen D, Suetens P, Willems G (2005) Semi-automated ultrasound facial soft tissue depth registration: method and validation. J Forensic Sci 50:1282–1288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    De Greef S, Claes P, Vandermeulen D, Mollemans W, Suetens P, Willems G (2006) Large-scale in-vivo Caucasian facial soft tissue thickness database for craniofacial reconstruction. Forensic Sci Int 159(Suppl 1):126–146Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    El-Mehallawi IH, Soliman EM (2001) Ultrasonic assessment of facial soft tissue thicknesses in adult Egyptians. Forensic Sci Int 117:99–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Utsuno H, Kageyama T, Deguchi T, Yoshino M, Miyazawa H, Inoue K (2005) Facial soft tissue thickness in Japanese female children. Forensic Sci Int 152:101–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Simpson E, Henneberg M (2002) Variation in soft-tissue thicknesses on the human face and their relation to craniometric dimensions. Am J Phys Anthropol 118:121–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ellis HD (1981) Theoretical aspects of face recognition. In: Davies G, Ellis HD, Shepherd J (eds) Perceiving and remembering faces. Academic, London, pp 171–197Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gérald Quatrehomme
    • 1
  • Thierry Balaguer
    • 2
  • Pascal Staccini
    • 3
  • Véronique Alunni-Perret
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Médecine Légale et Anthropologie médico-légale, Faculté de Médecine, GEPITOSUniversité de Nice Sophia Antipolis, CNRS K 2943NiceFrance
  2. 2.Service de Chirurgie plastique, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice, Faculté de Médecine, GEPITOSUniversité de Nice Sophia Antipolis, CNRS K 2943NiceFrance
  3. 3.Département de BiostatistiqueInformatique médicale, et Technologies de Communication, Faculté de MédecineNiceFrance

Personalised recommendations