Background: In recent decades, three-dimensional (3D) surface-imaging technologieshave gained popularity worldwide, but because most published articles that mention themare technical, clinicians often have difficulties gaining a proper understanding of them. Thisarticle aims to provide the reader with relevant information on 3D surface-imaging systems.In it, we compare the most recent technologies to reveal their differences.Methods: We have accessed five international companies with the latest technologies in 3Dsurface-imaging systems: 3dMD, Axisthree, Canfield, Crisalix and Dimensional Imaging (Di3D;in alphabetical order). We evaluated their technical equipment, independent validationstudies and corporate backgrounds.Results: The fastest capturing devices are the 3dMD and Di3D systems, capable of capturingimages within 1.5 and 1 ms, respectively. All companies provide software for tissue modifications.Additionally, 3dMD, Canfield and Di3D can fuse computed tomography (CT)/cone-beamcomputed tomography (CBCT) images into their 3D surface-imaging data. 3dMD and Di3D provide4D capture systems, which allow capturing the movement of a 3D surface over time. Crisalixgreatly differs from the other four systems as it is purely web based and realised via cloudcomputing.Conclusion: 3D surface-imaging systems are becoming important in today's plastic surgical setups,taking surgeons to a new level of communication with patients, surgical planning andoutcome evaluation. Technologies used in 3D surface-imaging systems and their intended field


Tzou, C.-H. J., Artner, N. M., Pona, I., Hold, A., Placheta, E., Kropatsch, W. G., & Frey, M. (2014). Comparison of three-dimensional surface-imaging systems. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, 67(4), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.01.003