Comparison of Nasal Analysis by Photographs (2D) against Low-cost Surface Laser Imaging (3D) and against Computed Axial Tomography Imaging.

Abstract

Introduction In aesthetic surgery, we have a few evaluation tools that numerically and objectively measure the changes we make in patients. This article aimed to evaluate the nasal systematic analysis and compare findings between the three systems of nasal evaluation: photographs 2D, 3D surface imaging with the Kinect system, and 3D CT scan imaging. Methods We designed a longitudinal and descriptive prospective study with simple non-blind randomization. To compare the systematic nasal analysis between the three methods. If the findings are similar, all three methods would be useful in independent clinical scenarios. Results A total of 42 observations were included finding a minimum age of 21 with a mean of 28 years old. Also, 64% were female, 93% had adequate facial proportions, and 50% were Fitzpatrick III. For outcome statistics, we found differential nasal deviation between 3D images with a mean of 6.53 mm. While when comparing the nasal dorsum length, we found a statistical significance of p = 0.051. When comparing the nasal dorsum length index, we found no significant difference p = 0.32. Also, we did not find statistical significance when comparing the nasofrontal angle and tip rotation angle p = 1 for both. Conclusion We found that the population we serve has characteristics of Hispanic mestizo nose. The three methods seem to evaluate systematic nasal analysis in a very similar way, and any of them can be used depending on the scenario and the needs of plastic surgeons.