Are Three-Dimensional Monitors More Appropriate Than Two-Dimensional Monitors in the Three-Dimensional Analysis?

Area of Science:

• Medical Imaging
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Computer-Aided Diagnosis

Background:

• Three-dimensional (3D) analysis of computed tomography (CT) reconstructions is standard in orthognathic surgery.
• Facial landmark identification is crucial for diagnostic accuracy and surgical planning.
• Current methods often involve viewing 3D reconstructions on 2D monitors.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the accuracy and efficiency of facial landmark identification using 3D versus 2D monitors.
• To evaluate the impact of monitor type on coordinate measurements of facial landmarks.
• To determine if 3D monitors offer advantages for orthognathic surgery diagnosis.

Main Methods:

• 3D reconstructions of facial bone CT data from 30 patients were analyzed.
• Four researchers identified 33 facial landmarks multiple times on both 2D and 3D monitors.
• Measurements included x, y, and z coordinates, and time taken for identification.

Main Results:

• High inter-reader reliability (>0.8 intraclass coefficient) was observed for both 2D and 3D monitor analyses.
• Landmark identification was faster on 3D monitors (2 min 25 sec) compared to 2D monitors (2 min 46 sec).
• Variance in coordinate measurements differed between 2D and 3D monitors, particularly for landmarks near the facial midline.

Conclusions:

• 3D monitor use may enhance the accuracy of facial landmark identification in orthognathic surgery.
• Faster identification times and potential improvements in coordinate accuracy suggest benefits for 3D displays.
• Utilizing 3D monitors could lead to more precise facial diagnoses and surgical planning.