Validation of lower limb segmental volumetry with hand-held, self-positioning three-dimensional laser scanner against water displacement
Validation of lower limb segmental volumetry with hand-held, self-positioning three-dimensional laser scanner against water displacement
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jvsv.2013.08.002
复制
发表时间：
2014-01-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Quere, Isabelle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mestre, Sandrine;Veye, Florent;Quere, Isabelle
背景：肢体体积测量有助于水肿的评估和随访，特别是慢性静脉功能不全（CVI）或淋巴水肿患者。水驱法（WD）是肢体容积测量的参考方法，但并不真正适合临床常规。基于周长测量的间接体积测量以及更广泛但自动化的光电技术不允许在肢体末端进行详细测量。方法：采用动态参考的自定位激光扫描仪对30例CVI患者、30例淋巴水肿患者和30例健康对照者的下肢体积进行采集和实时三维（3D）重建。两名独立观察者进行一次或两次激光扫描，其结果在观察者内部和观察者之间进行重复性测试，并通过Lin的一致性相关系数和Bland和Altman图形分析与WD体积法进行比较。结果：在1例严重淋巴水肿患者中，三维激光扫描数据自动计算体积失败。in - observer no.的Lin’s一致性相关系数分别为0.99和0.98。1和no。2、观察者间再现性分别为0.98和0.96；1号观察员和1号观察员。2和WD的比较。三维激光扫描精度为1.99%。第1号观测者的准确率为3.12%。1和2.71%的观察者。2、激光扫描值比WD高90ml，这可能是测量时姿势不同造成的。结论：三维激光扫描准确、重复性好，适用于CVI或淋巴水肿患者肢体体积的评估。
Background: Measurement of limb volume is helpful for the evaluation and follow-up of edema, especially in patients with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) or lymphedema. Water displacement (WD) is the reference method for limb volume try but is not really suitable for clinical routine. Indirect volumetry based on circumference measurements as well as the more expansive but automatic optoelectronic techniques do not allow detailed measurement at the extremity of the limb.Methods: We used a self-positioning laser scanner with dynamic referencing for acquisition and real-time three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of the lower limb volume in 30 patients with CVI, 30 patients with lymphedema, and 30 healthy controls. Two independent observers performed either one or two laser scans, whose results were tested for intra- and interobserver reproducibility and compared with WD volumetry by Lin's concordance correlation coefficient and Bland and Altman graphic analysis.Results: Automatic volume calculation from 3D laser scanning data failed in one patient with major lymphedema. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient was 0.99 and 0.98, respectively, for intraobserver no. 1 and no. 2, 0.98 for inter observer reproducibility, and 0.98 and 0.96, respectively, for observer no. 1 and observer no. 2 vs WD comparison. The 3D laser scanning yielded 1.99% precision. Accuracy was 3.12% for observer no. 1 and 2.71% for observer no. 2, laser scanning values being 90 mL higher than WD, which could be attributed to the different posture during measurement.Conclusions: Three-dimensional laser scanning is accurate and reproducible, and appears suitable for the evaluation of limb volume in patients with CVI or lymphedema.