北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2014, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (1): 76-80.

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

3种不同原理颜面部扫描仪测量精度的评价

赵一姣,熊玉雪,杨慧芳,王勇△   

  1. (北京大学口腔医学院·口腔医院口腔医学计算机应用中心,口腔数字化医疗技术和材料国家工程实验室,卫生部口腔医学计算机应用工程技 术研究中心,北京100081)
  • 出版日期:2014-02-18 发布日期:2014-02-18

Evaluation of measurement accuracy of three facial scanners based on different scanning principles

ZHAO Yi-jiao, XIONG Yu-xue, YANG Hui-fang, WANG Yong△   

  1. (Center of Digital Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology & National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology & Research Center of Engineering and Technology for Digital Dentistry, Ministry of Health, Beijing 100081, China)
  • Online:2014-02-18 Published:2014-02-18

摘要: 目的:对基于线激光、结构光、立体摄影原理的3种颜面部扫描仪的测量精度进行定量评价与横向比较。方法:分别应用3种颜面部扫 描仪对同一石膏头像模型获取其表面形貌数据,测量3个三维模型上的10个特征线段长度和5个特征角度,分别与高精度接触式三坐标测量获得 的标准值进行统计学分析与测量学分析,获得各个扫描仪针对面部形貌的理论测量精度。结果:3种面部扫描仪的特征测量值与标准值之间的差 异无统计学意义,3dMD立体摄影与Faro线激光扫描仪的长度测量精度较好,Faro线激光扫描仪的角度测量精度较好。结论:3种面部扫描仪测量 数据的可信度较高,扫描患者的实际精度表现尚待进一步研究。

关键词: 成像, 三维, 面部, 尺寸测量精度, 激光扫描

Abstract: Objective:To evaluate and compare the measurement accuracy of three facial scanners, based on different scanning principles: line laser, structured light and stereophotography. Methods:Three-dimensional (3D) digital face models of the same plaster head model were obtained by three facial scanners separately. The measurement values of the length of 10 feature lines and the angle of 5 feature angles were measured on these 3D models in the software respectively. The standard values of these characteristics were measured by a coordinate measure machine (CMM) with high accuracy. Statistical and surveying analyses were made between the measurement values and standard values. Facial morphology theory measurement accuracy of these three facial scanners was obtained finally. Results:There was no statistical significant difference between the measurement values from the three facial scanners and the standard value from CMM. The 3dMD and Faro scanners were better in length measurements and the length measurement accuracy was about 0.2 mm. The Faro scanner was also better in angle measurements and the angle measurement accuracy was about 0.5°. Conclusion: The three facial scanners all have good reliability in facial measurements, and their actual measurement accuracy for patients needs further research.

Key words: Imaging, three-dimensional, Face, Dimensional measurement accuracy, Laser scanning

[1] 邢念增,王明帅,杨飞亚,尹路,韩苏军. 前列腺免活检创新理念的临床实践及其应用前景[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(4): 565-566.
[2] 田宇轩,阮明健,刘毅,李德润,吴静云,沈棋,范宇,金杰. 双参数MRI改良PI-RADS评分4分和5分病灶的最大径对临床有意义前列腺癌的预测效果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(4): 567-574.
[3] 唐祖南,胡耒豪,陈震,于尧,章文博,彭歆. 增强现实技术在口腔颌面颈部解剖识别中的应用评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(3): 541-545.
[4] 吕梁,张铭津,温奧楠,赵一姣,王勇,李晶,杨庚辰,柳大为. 应用三维软组织空间线角模板法评价颏部对称性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 106-110.
[5] 毛渤淳,田雅婧,王雪东,李晶,周彦恒. 骨性Ⅱ类高角患者拔牙矫治前后的面部软硬组织变化[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 111-119.
[6] 凌晓彤,屈留洋,郑丹妮,杨静,闫雪冰,柳登高,高岩. 牙源性钙化囊肿与牙源性钙化上皮瘤的三维影像特点[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2024, 56(1): 131-137.
[7] 刘毅,袁昌巍,吴静云,沈棋,肖江喜,赵峥,王霄英,李学松,何志嵩,周利群. 靶向穿刺+6针系统穿刺对PI-RADS 5分患者的前列腺癌诊断效能[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(5): 812-817.
[8] 袁昌巍,李德润,李志华,刘毅,山刚志,李学松,周利群. 多参数磁共振成像中动态对比增强状态在诊断PI-RADS 4分前列腺癌中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(5): 838-842.
[9] 刘颖,霍然,徐慧敏,王筝,王涛,袁慧书. 磁共振血管壁成像评估颈动脉中重度狭窄患者斑块特征与脑血流灌注的相关性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 646-651.
[10] 傅强,高冠英,徐雁,林卓华,孙由静,崔立刚. 无症状髋关节前上盂唇撕裂超声与磁共振检查的对比研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 665-669.
[11] 刘想,谢辉辉,许玉峰,张晓东,陶晓峰,柳林,王霄英. 人工智能对提高放射科住院医生诊断胸部肋骨骨折一致性的价值[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 670-675.
[12] 黄莹,吴志远,周行红,蔡志刚,张杰. 股前外侧皮瓣修复上颌骨缺损术后面部软组织对称性感观分级[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 708-715.
[13] 张雯,刘筱菁,李自力,张益. 基于解剖标志的鼻翼基底缩窄缝合术对正颌患者术后鼻唇部形态的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(4): 736-742.
[14] 王哲,孙伟,杨雪,宋颖,姬爱平,白洁. 口腔急诊颌面部感染患者临床分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(3): 543-547.
[15] 欧蒙恩,丁云,唐卫峰,周永胜. 基台边缘-牙冠的平台转移结构中粘接剂流动的三维有限元分析[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2023, 55(3): 548-552.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!