3D dental images in forensic odontology: A scoping review of superimposition approaches utilizing 3D imaging

IF 1 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Harry Perkins , Thao Liang Chiam , Alex Forrest , Denice Higgins
{"title":"3D dental images in forensic odontology: A scoping review of superimposition approaches utilizing 3D imaging","authors":"Harry Perkins ,&nbsp;Thao Liang Chiam ,&nbsp;Alex Forrest ,&nbsp;Denice Higgins","doi":"10.1016/j.fri.2024.200622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Forensic odontology is crucial for human identification, especially in disaster scenarios, using comparisons between antemortem and postmortem dental data. Advances in 3D imaging have shifted practices from traditional 2D methods to 3D superimposition techniques, necessitating a comprehensive review. This scoping review maps current 3D superimposition methodologies in forensic odontology, focusing on key processes, sources of error, and research gaps.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework, searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and DOSS for studies from January 2017. Search strategies incorporated MeSH and Emtree terms, Boolean operators, and truncations. Inclusion criteria required studies to utilize 3D superimposition techniques for comparing dental imaging, with exclusions for 2D imaging, non-forensic focus, and inaccessible texts. Data were extracted on anatomical features, imaging techniques, methods, and outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 545 records, 20 studies met inclusion criteria. Most employed surface-based superimposition. Methodologies varied widely, with inconsistent software use and a lack of standardization. Root Mean Square (RMS) values were commonly used to assess alignment, but thresholds differed significantly across studies. Key challenges include operator variability and limited access to affordable software.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The rapid advancement of 3D imaging in forensic odontology highlights the need for standardized methods. While surface-based techniques are promising, establishing uniform benchmarks and developing open-source tools are crucial for improving reliability and global adoption.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":40763,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Imaging","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 200622"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666225624000459","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Forensic odontology is crucial for human identification, especially in disaster scenarios, using comparisons between antemortem and postmortem dental data. Advances in 3D imaging have shifted practices from traditional 2D methods to 3D superimposition techniques, necessitating a comprehensive review. This scoping review maps current 3D superimposition methodologies in forensic odontology, focusing on key processes, sources of error, and research gaps.

Methods

We used Arksey and O'Malley's framework, searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and DOSS for studies from January 2017. Search strategies incorporated MeSH and Emtree terms, Boolean operators, and truncations. Inclusion criteria required studies to utilize 3D superimposition techniques for comparing dental imaging, with exclusions for 2D imaging, non-forensic focus, and inaccessible texts. Data were extracted on anatomical features, imaging techniques, methods, and outcomes.

Results

From 545 records, 20 studies met inclusion criteria. Most employed surface-based superimposition. Methodologies varied widely, with inconsistent software use and a lack of standardization. Root Mean Square (RMS) values were commonly used to assess alignment, but thresholds differed significantly across studies. Key challenges include operator variability and limited access to affordable software.

Conclusions

The rapid advancement of 3D imaging in forensic odontology highlights the need for standardized methods. While surface-based techniques are promising, establishing uniform benchmarks and developing open-source tools are crucial for improving reliability and global adoption.
法医牙科学中的3D牙科图像:利用3D成像的叠加方法的范围审查
法医牙科学对人类身份识别至关重要,特别是在灾难场景中,通过比较死前和死后的牙齿数据。3D成像的进步已经将传统的2D方法转变为3D叠加技术,因此有必要进行全面的审查。这范围审查地图当前3D叠加方法在法医牙科学,重点是关键过程,错误的来源,和研究差距。方法我们使用Arksey和O'Malley的框架,检索PubMed、Embase、Scopus和DOSS从2017年1月开始的研究。搜索策略包括MeSH和Emtree术语、布尔运算符和截断。纳入标准要求研究利用3D叠加技术来比较牙科成像,排除2D成像、非法医焦点和无法获取的文本。提取有关解剖特征、成像技术、方法和结果的数据。结果545份文献中,20项研究符合纳入标准。大多数采用基于表面的叠加。方法差异很大,软件使用不一致,缺乏标准化。均方根(RMS)值通常用于评估对齐性,但不同研究的阈值差异显著。主要的挑战包括操作人员的可变性和有限的可负担软件。结论随着法医口腔医学三维成像技术的快速发展,迫切需要标准化的三维成像方法。虽然基于表面的技术很有前途,但建立统一的基准和开发开源工具对于提高可靠性和全球采用至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Forensic Imaging
Forensic Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
27.30%
发文量
39
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信