Validation of a computer modelled forensic facial reconstruction technique using CT data from live subjects: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION Human forensic facial soft tissue reconstructions are used when post-mortem deterioration makes identification difficult by usual means. The aim is to trigger recognition of the in vivo countenance of the individual by a friend or family member. A further use is in the field of archaeology. There are a number of different methods that can be applied to complete the facial reconstruction, ranging from two dimensional drawings, three dimensional clay models and now, with the advances of three dimensional technology, three dimensional computerised modelling. Studies carried out to assess the accuracy of facial reconstructions have produced variable results over the years. Advances in three dimensional imaging techniques in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery, particularly cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), now provides an opportunity to utilise the data of live subjects and assess the accuracy of the three dimensional computerised facial reconstruction technique. AIM The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of a computer modelled facial reconstruction technique using CBCT data from live subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS This retrospective pilot study was carried out at the Glasgow Dental Hospital Orthodontic Department and the Centre of Anatomy and Human Identification, Dundee University School of Life Sciences. Ten patients (5 male and 5 female; mean age 23 years) with mild skeletal discrepancies with pre-surgical cone beam CT data (CBCT) were included in this study. The actual and forensic reconstruction soft tissues were analysed using 3D software to look at differences between landmarks, linear and angular measurements and surface meshes. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION There were no statistical differences for 18 out of the 23 linear and 7 out of 8 angular measurements between the reconstruction and the target (p<0.05). The use of Procrustes superimposition has highlighted potential problems with soft tissue depth and anatomical landmarks' position. Surface mesh analysis showed that this virtual sculpture technique can be objectively assessed using the distance between the meshes. This study found that the percentage of faces with less than ±2.5mm error ranged from 56% to 90%. This may be improved if Procrustes superimposition could be applied to all the mesh points rather than specific landmarks.

[1]  G. Macho,et al.  An appraisal of plastic reconstruction of the external nose. , 1986, Journal of forensic sciences.

[2]  D. Vandermeulen,et al.  Large-scale in-vivo Caucasian facial soft tissue thickness database for craniofacial reconstruction. , 2006, Forensic science international.

[3]  S. Richmond,et al.  A blind accuracy assessment of computer-modeled forensic facial reconstruction using computed tomography data from live subjects , 2006, Forensic science, medicine, and pathology.

[4]  W J Houston,et al.  The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. , 1983, American journal of orthodontics.

[5]  C N Stephan,et al.  Mouth width prediction in craniofacial identification: cadaver tests of four recent methods, including two techniques for edentulous skulls. , 2008, The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology.

[6]  Carl N Stephan,et al.  Facial approximation: globe projection guideline falsified by exophthalmometry literature. , 2002, Journal of forensic sciences.

[7]  S. E. Whitnall The Anatomy of the Human Orbit: And Accessory Organs of Vision , 2015 .

[8]  William R Proffit,et al.  Three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography for assessment of mandibular changes after orthognathic surgery. , 2007, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[9]  Derrick Vail The Anatomy of the Eye and Orbit , 1941 .

[10]  P Vanezi,et al.  Facial reconstruction using 3-D computer graphics. , 2000, Forensic science international.

[11]  Carl N Stephan,et al.  Predicting nose projection and pronasale position in facial approximation: a test of published methods and proposal of new guidelines. , 2003, American journal of physical anthropology.

[12]  Campbell Hm,et al.  The need for orthodontic treatment. A pilot survey of 14 year old school children in Paisley, Scotland. , 1974 .

[13]  Christopher Rynn,et al.  Appraisal of traditional and recently proposed relationships between the hard and soft dimensions of the nose in profile. , 2006, American journal of physical anthropology.

[14]  Caroline M Wilkinson,et al.  Measurement of eyeball protrusion and its application in facial reconstruction. , 2003, Journal of forensic sciences.

[15]  Douglas H. Ubelaker,et al.  Reconstructing the Shape of the Nose According to the Skull , 2002 .

[16]  Carl N Stephan,et al.  Facial approximation: an evaluation of mouth-width determination. , 2003, American journal of physical anthropology.

[17]  Christopher Rynn,et al.  Prediction of nasal morphology from the skull , 2010, Forensic science, medicine, and pathology.

[18]  Richard Helmer,et al.  Schädelidentifizierung durch elektronische Bildmischung : Zugleich ein Beitrag zur Konstitutionsbiometrie und Dickenmessung der Gesichtsweichteile , 1984 .

[19]  Won-Joon Lee,et al.  An Accuracy Assessment of Forensic Computerized Facial Reconstruction Employing Cone‐Beam Computed Tomography from Live Subjects , 2012, Journal of forensic sciences.

[20]  Pascal Staccini,et al.  Assessment of the accuracy of three-dimensional manual craniofacial reconstruction: a series of 25 controlled cases , 2007, International Journal of Legal Medicine.

[21]  W. M. Krogman The human skeleton in forensic medicine. I. , 1963, Postgraduate medicine.

[22]  B. Prahl-Andersen The need for orthodontic treatment. , 1978, The Angle orthodontist.

[23]  Carl N Stephan,et al.  The Placement of the Human Eyeball and Canthi in Craniofacial Identification , 2008, Journal of forensic sciences.

[24]  T Sitalaximi,et al.  Autosomal microsatellite profile of three socially diverse ethnic Tamil populations of India. , 2003, Journal of forensic sciences.

[25]  Caroline Wilkinson,et al.  Facial reconstruction – anatomical art or artistic anatomy? , 2010, Journal of anatomy.

[26]  Robert M. George,et al.  The Lateral Craniographic Method of Facial Reconstruction , 1987 .

[27]  P Vanezis,et al.  Application of 3-D computer graphics for facial reconstruction and comparison with sculpting techniques. , 1989, Forensic science international.

[28]  John Prag,et al.  Making Faces: Using forensic and archaeological evidence , 1999 .

[29]  D. Vandermeulen,et al.  The influence of sex, age and body mass index on facial soft tissue depths , 2009, Forensic science, medicine, and pathology.

[30]  B. P. Gatliff,et al.  Reconstruction of facial features from the skull: an evaluation of its usefulness in forensic anthropology. , 1970, American journal of physical anthropology.

[31]  Simon R. Arridge,et al.  Three-dimensional visualization of the face and skull using computerized tomography and laser scanning techniques , 1987 .