Comparison of Manual (2D) and Digital (3D) Methods in the Assessment of Simulated Facial Edema

Background: An edema assessment following dental surgeries is essential to improving the dental surgeon's technique and, consequentially, patient comfort. Purpose: Two-dimensional (2D) methods are limited in analyzing 3-dimensional (3D) surfaces. Currently, 3D methods are used to investigate postoperative swelling. However, there are no studies that directly compare 2D and 3D methods. The goal of this study is to directly compare 2D and 3D methods used in the assessment of postoperative edema. Study design and sample: The investigators implemented a prospective, cross-sectional study with each subject serving as its own control. The sample was composed of dental student volunteers without facial deformities. Predictor variable: The predictor variable is the method used to measure edema. After simulating edema, manual (2D) and digital (3D) techniques were used to measure edema. The manual method used direct facial perimeter measurements. The two digital methods were photogrammetry using a smartphone (iPhone 11, Apple Inc, Cupertino, California), and facial scanning with a smartphone application (Bellus3D FaceApp, Bellus3D Inc, Campbell, California) [3D measurements] Main outcome variable: The coefficient of variation (CV) (CV = standard deviation /mean) was used to assess homogeneity of edema measurements. Analysis: The Shapiro–Wilk and equal variance tests were applied to assess data homogeneity. Next, one-way analysis of variance was performed, followed by a correlation analysis. Finally, the data were submitted to Tukey's test. The statistical significance threshold was set at 5% (P < .05). Results: The sample was composed of 20 subjects aged 18-38 years. The CV showed higher values using the manual (2D) method (47%; 4.88% ± 2.99), compared with the photogrammetry method (18%; 8.55 mm ± 1.52) and the smartphone application (21%; 8.97 mm ± 1.93). A statistically significant difference was observed between the manual method values and those of the other two groups (P < .001). There was no difference between the facial scanning and photogrammetry groups (3D methods) (P = .778) Conclusion and Relevance: Both digital measuring methods (3D) demonstrated greater homogeneity than the manual method in analyzing facial distortions caused by the same swelling simulation. Therefore, it can be affirmed that digital methods may be more reliable that manual methods for assessing facial edema.