andreas artopoulos - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by andreas artopoulos
Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
The aim of this study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) imaging accuracy between a digita... more The aim of this study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) imaging accuracy between a digital stereophotogrammetry device and a projection moiré profilometry setup using anatomical models in conjunction with surface matching software. Twenty-two 3D surface models of the middle third of the face derived from computed tomography (CT) scans were used to fabricate photopolymer models by rapid prototyping. These were digitized using digital stereophotogrammetry and projection moiré profilometry. The 3D surface models acquired were compared for shape differences with the original CT models using surface matching software. Global registration between each pair of corresponding models was carried out using an iterative closest point algorithm. The mean surface deviations following registration were used to calculate Bland-Altman limits of agreement between the two methods. The distributions of measured surface differences were used to calculate L-moments. Paired t-tests were carried ou...
Imaging Science in Dentistry
Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of a low-cost portable... more Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of a low-cost portable scanner (Scanify) for imaging facial casts compared to a previously validated portable digital stereophotogrammetry device (Vectra H1). This in vitro study was performed using 2 facial casts obtained by recording impressions of the authors, at King's College London Academic Centre of Reconstructive Science. Materials and Methods: The casts were marked with anthropometric landmarks, then digitised using Scanify and Vectra H1. Computed tomography (CT) scans of the same casts were performed to verify the validation of Vectra H1. The 3-dimensional (3D) images acquired with each device were compared using linear measurements and 3D surface analysis software. Results: Overall, 91% of the linear Scanify measurements were within 1 mm of the corresponding reference values. The mean overall surface difference between the Scanify and Vectra images was <0.3 mm. Significant differences were detected in depth measurements. Merging multiple Scanify images produced significantly greater registration error. Conclusion: Scanify is a very low-cost device that could have clinical applications for facial imaging if imaging errors could be corrected by a future software update or hardware revision.
Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
Hellenic Archives of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
The aim of this study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) imaging accuracy between a digita... more The aim of this study was to compare the three-dimensional (3D) imaging accuracy between a digital stereophotogrammetry device and a projection moiré profilometry setup using anatomical models in conjunction with surface matching software. Twenty-two 3D surface models of the middle third of the face derived from computed tomography (CT) scans were used to fabricate photopolymer models by rapid prototyping. These were digitized using digital stereophotogrammetry and projection moiré profilometry. The 3D surface models acquired were compared for shape differences with the original CT models using surface matching software. Global registration between each pair of corresponding models was carried out using an iterative closest point algorithm. The mean surface deviations following registration were used to calculate Bland-Altman limits of agreement between the two methods. The distributions of measured surface differences were used to calculate L-moments. Paired t-tests were carried ou...
Imaging Science in Dentistry
Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of a low-cost portable... more Purpose: The goal of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of a low-cost portable scanner (Scanify) for imaging facial casts compared to a previously validated portable digital stereophotogrammetry device (Vectra H1). This in vitro study was performed using 2 facial casts obtained by recording impressions of the authors, at King's College London Academic Centre of Reconstructive Science. Materials and Methods: The casts were marked with anthropometric landmarks, then digitised using Scanify and Vectra H1. Computed tomography (CT) scans of the same casts were performed to verify the validation of Vectra H1. The 3-dimensional (3D) images acquired with each device were compared using linear measurements and 3D surface analysis software. Results: Overall, 91% of the linear Scanify measurements were within 1 mm of the corresponding reference values. The mean overall surface difference between the Scanify and Vectra images was <0.3 mm. Significant differences were detected in depth measurements. Merging multiple Scanify images produced significantly greater registration error. Conclusion: Scanify is a very low-cost device that could have clinical applications for facial imaging if imaging errors could be corrected by a future software update or hardware revision.