The current progress and critical analysis of three-dimensional scanning and three-dimensional printing applications in breast surgery

Evaluation of Vectra® XT 3D Surface Imaging Technology in Measuring Breast Symmetry and Breast Volume

BACKGROUND

Breast symmetry is an essential component of breast cosmesis. The Harvard Cosmesis scale is the most widely adopted method of breast symmetry assessment. However, this scale lacks reproducibility and reliability, limiting its application in clinical practice. The VECTRA® XT 3D (VECTRA®) is a novel breast surface imaging system that, when combined with breast contour measuring software (Mirror®), aims to produce a more accurate and reproducible measurement of breast contour to aid operative planning in breast surgery.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare the reliability and reproducibility of subjective (Harvard Cosmesis scale) with objective (VECTRA®) symmetry assessment on the same cohort of patients.

METHODS

Patients at a tertiary institution had 2D and 3D photographs of their breasts. Seven assessors scored the 2D photographs using the Harvard Cosmesis scale. Two independent assessors used Mirror® software to objectively calculate breast symmetry by analysing 3D images of the breasts.

RESULTS

Intra-observer agreement ranged from none to moderate (kappa - 0.005-0.7) amongst the assessors using the Harvard Cosmesis scale. Inter-observer agreement was weak (kappa 0.078-0.454) amongst Harvard scores compared to VECTRA® measurements. Kappa values ranged 0.537-0.674 for intra-observer agreement (p < 0.001) with Root Mean Square (RMS) scores. RMS had a moderate correlation with the Harvard Cosmesis scale (r_s = 0.613). Furthermore, absolute volume difference between breasts had poor correlation with RMS (R² = 0.133).

CONCLUSION

VECTRA® and Mirror® software have potential in clinical practice as objectifying breast symmetry, but in the current form, it is not an ideal test.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.