Reliability of Periocular Anthropometry: A Comparison of Direct, 2-Dimensional, and 3-Dimensional Techniques

Reliability of Periocular Anthropometry: A Comparison of Direct, 2-Dimensional, and 3-Dimensional Techniques: BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging has become increasingly popular in aesthetic surgery. However, few studies have emphasized its application in the periocular region.

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence supporting the reliability of generalizing periocular measurements obtained using caliper-derived direct anthropometry and 2-dimensional (2D) photogrammetry to 3D stereophotogrammetry.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Periocular surfaces were captured using a stereophotogrammetry system for 46 normal Caucasian individuals. Twenty-two periocular variables were directly, 2-dimensionally, and 3-dimensionally measured. Reliability of these measurements was evaluated and compared with each other.

RESULTS

The results revealed that, for direct (intra-rater reliability only), 2D, and 3D anthropometry, overall intra-rater and inter-rater intraclass correlation coefficient estimates were 0.88, 0.99 and 0.97, and 0.98 and 0.92, respectively; mean absolute differences were 0.84 mm, 0.26 and 0.36 units, and 0.35 and 0.67 units, respectively; technical error of measurement (TEM) estimates were 0.85 mm, 0.25 and 0.36 units, and 0.32 and 0.65 units, respectively; relative error measurement estimates were 6.46%, 1.69% and 2.74%, and 1.67% and 5.11%, respectively; and relative TEM estimates were 6.25%, 1.62% and 2.78%, and 2.12% and 5.12%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Stereophotogrammetry and the authors' landmark location protocol yield very good reliability for a series of 2D and 3D measurements.