Advertisement

Three-Dimensional Facial Morphometry: From Anthropometry to Digital Morphology

  • Chiarella Sforza
  • Claudia Dellavia
  • Marcio De Menezes
  • Riccardo Rosati
  • Virgilio F. Ferrario
Chapter

Abstract

Several basic and clinical disciplines are interested in the quantitative assessment of the dimensions of human facial soft-tissue structures (eyes, nose, mouth and lips, chin, ears), and of their reciprocal spatial positions and relative proportions. Anatomical and anthropometric descriptions, medical evaluations (genetics; maxillo-facial, plastic and esthetic surgery; dentistry), forensic medicine, they all need reference three-dimensional data collected on healthy, normal individuals selected for sex, age, ethnic group, to be compared to those obtained on the single patient. Data collection should be made non-invasively, rapidly, simply, directly on the subjects using low-cost instruments. All data should be digital, thus entering computerized data bases that can be used to visualize and simulate treatment. Currently, in clinical investigations and research classic direct anthropometry is being replaced with various three-dimensional image analyzers. Optical, non-contact digitizers (mainly, laser scanners and stereophotogrammetric devices) perform a fast digitization of the face, providing a detailed analysis of the soft-tissue surface. Contact instruments (electromagnetic and electromechanic digitizers) digitize discrete soft-tissue facial landmarks. Subsequently, landmark coordinates are used into mathematical and geometric models of the face, and angles, distances and ratios similar to those measured in conventional anthropometry can be obtained. Additionally, multivariate methods of analysis, obtained either from geometric morphometry or from other analytical methods, could be used. Overall, computerized instruments seem sufficiently reliable, simple and fast to be used also within clinical contexts, thus providing useful quantitative information to allow a better patient care, without submitting the subjects to potentially harmful procedures.

Keywords

Celiac Disease Fetal Alcohol Syndrome Facial Morphology Facial Reconstruction Facial Landmark 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

3D

Three-dimensional

SD

Standard deviation

CAD

Computer aided design

CAM

Computer aided machinery

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are deeply indebted to all the subjects who served as volunteers in our laboratory. The precious work of staff and students, who helped in data collection and analysis, is also gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Aldridge K, Boyadjiev SA, Capone GT, DeLeon VB, Richtsmeier JT. Precision and error of three-dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images. Am J Med Genet. 2005;138A:247–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. DeAngelis D, Sala R, Cantatore A, Grandi M, Cattaneo C. A new computer-assisted technique to aid personal identification. Int J Legal Med. 2009;123:351–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dellavia C, Catti F, Sforza C, Grandi G, Ferrario VF. Noninvasive longitudinal assessment of facial growth in children and adolescents with Hypohidrotic Ectodermal Dysplasia. Eur J Oral Sci. 2008;116:305–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Douglas TS, Martinez F, Meintjes EM, Vaughan CL, Viljoen DL. Eye feature extraction for diagnosing the facial phenotype associated with fetal alcohol syndrome. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2003;41:101–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fang S, McLaughlin J, Fang J, Huang J, Autti-Ramo I, Fagerlund A, Jacobson SW, Robinson LK, Hoyme HE, Mattson SN, Riley E, Zhou F, Ward R, Moore ES, Foroud T, Collaborative Initiative on Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders. Automated diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome using 3D facial image analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2008;11:162–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Farkas LG. Anthropometry of the head and face. 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  7. Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR, Alt KW, Bagic I, Baltadjiev G, Cuhìnha E, Cvicelova M, Davies S, Erasmus I, Gillet-Netting R, Hajnis K, Kemkes-Grottenthaler A, Khomyakova I, Kumi A, Kgamphe JS, Kayo-daigo N, Le T, Malinowski A, Negasheva M, Manolis S, Ogeturk M, Parvizead R, Rosing F, Sahu P, Sforza C, Sivkov S, Sultanova N, Tomazo-Ravnik T, Toth G, Uzun A, Yahia E. International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/ races. J Craniofac Surg. 2005;126:615–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Poggio CE, Cova M, Tartaglia G. Preliminary evaluation of an electromagnetic three-­dimensional digitizer in facial anthropometry. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J. 1998;35:9–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Serrao G, Ciusa V, Dellavia C. Growth and aging of facial soft tissues: A computerized ­three-dimensional mesh diagram analysis. Clin Anat. 2003;16:420–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghoddousi H, Edler R, Haers P, Wertheim D, Greenhill D. Comparison of three methods of facial measurement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36:250–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hajeer MY, Ayoub AF, Millett DT. Three-dimensional assessment of facial soft-tissue asymmetry before and after orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2004;42:396–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hammond P, Hutton TJ, Allanson JE, Campbell LE, Hennekam RC, Holden S, Patton MA, Shaw A, Temple IK, Trotter M, Murphy KC, Winter RM. 3D analysis of facial morphology. Am J Med Genet. 2004;126A:339–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hennessy RJ, McLearie S, Kinsella A, Waddington JL. Facial shape and asymmetry by three-dimensional laser surface scanning covary with cognition in a sexually dimorphic manner. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2006;18:73–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maal TJ, Plooij JM, Rangel FA, Mollemans W, Schutyser FA, Bergé SJ. The accuracy of matching three-dimensional photographs with skin surfaces derived from cone-beam computed tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;37:641–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Majid Z, Chong CA, Ahmad A, Setan H, Setan H, Samsudin AR. Photogrammetry and 3D laser scanning as spatial data capture techniques for a national craniofacial database. Photogramm Rec. 2005;20:48–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mori A, Nakajima T, Kaneko T, Sakuma H, Aoki Y. Analysis of 109 Japanese children’s lip and nose shapes using 3-dimensional digitizer. Br J Plast Surg. 2005;58:318–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ozsoy U, Demirel BM, Yildirim FB, Tosun O, Sarikcioglu L. Method selection in craniofacial measurements: Advantages and disadvantages of 3D digitization method. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2009;37:285–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Plooij JM, Swennen GR, Rangel FA, Maal TJJ, Schutyser FAC, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Bergé SJ. Evaluation of reproducibility and reliability of 3D soft tissue analysis using 3D stereophotogrammetry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;38:267–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sawyer AR, See M, Nduka C. 3D stereophotogrammetry quantitative lip analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2009;33:497–504.Google Scholar
  20. Schwenzer-Zimmerer K, Chaitidis D, Berg-Boerner I, Krol Z, Kovacs L, Schwenzer NF, Zimmerer S, Holberg C, Zeilhofer HF. Quantitative 3D soft tissue analysis of symmetry prior to and after unilateral cleft lip repair ­compared with non-cleft persons (performed in Cambodia). J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2008;36:431–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sforza C, Ferrario VF. Soft-tissue facial anthropometry in three dimensions: from anatomical landmarks to digital morphology in research, clinics and forensic anthropology. J Anthropol Sci. 2006;84:97–124.Google Scholar
  22. Sforza C, Peretta R, Grandi G, Ferronato G, Ferrario VF. Three-dimensional facial morphometry in skeletal Class III patients. A non-invasive study of soft-tissue changes before and after orthognathic surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;45:138–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sforza C, Grandi G, Catti F, Tommasi DG, Ugolini A, Ferrario VF. Age- and sex- related changes in the soft tissues of the orbital region. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;185:115.e1–115.e8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shaner DJ, Peterson AE, Beattie OB, Bamforth JS. Assessment of soft tissue facial asymmetry in medically normal and syndrome-affected individuals by analysis of landmarks and measurements. Am J Med Genet. 2000;93:143–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weinberg SM, Scott NM, Neiswanger K, Brandon CA, Marazita ML. Digital three-dimensional photogrammetry: evaluation of anthropometric precision and accuracy using a Genex 3D camera system. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J. 2004;41:507–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Weinberg SM, Naidoo S, Govier DP, Martin RA, Kane AA, Marazita ML. Anthropometric precision and accuracy of digital three-dimensional photogrammetry: comparing the Genex and 3dMD imaging systems with one another and with direct anthropometry. J Craniofac Surg. 2006;17:477–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. White JE, Ayoub AF, Hosey MT, Bock M, Bowman A, Bowman J, Siebert JP, Ray A. Three-dimensional facial characteristics of caucasian infants without cleft and correlation with body measurements. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J. 2004;41:593–602.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wong JY, Oh AK, Ohta E, Hunt AT, Rogers GF, Mulliken JB, Deutsch CK. Validity and reliability of craniofacial anthropometric measurement of 3D digital photogrammetric images. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J. 2008;45:232–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yamada T, Mori Y, Minami K, Mishima K, Tsukamoto Y. Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology in normal Japanese children as control data for cleft surgery. Cleft Palate-Craniofac J. 2002;39:517–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zankl A, Eberle L, Molinari L, Schinzel A. Growth charts for nose length, nasal protrusion, and philtrum length from birth to 97 years. Am J Med Genet. 2002;111:388–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chiarella Sforza
    • 1
  • Claudia Dellavia
  • Marcio De Menezes
  • Riccardo Rosati
  • Virgilio F. Ferrario
  1. 1.Functional Anatomy Research Center (FARC), Laboratorio di Anatomia Funzionale dell’Apparato Stomatognatico (LAFAS), Dipartimento di Morfologia Umana e Scienze Biomediche “Città Studi,” Facoltà di Medicina e ChirurgiaUniversità degli Studi di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations