SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Breast Surgery
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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 (rs = 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 8.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Godden AR, O’Connell RL, Barry PA et al (2020) 3-Dimensional objective aesthetic evaluation to replace panel assessment after breast-conserving treatment. Breast Cancer 27(6):1126–1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-020-01117-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cardoso MJ, Oliveira H, Cardoso J (2014) Assessing cosmetic results after breast conserving surgery. J Surg Oncol 110(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.23596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. O’Connell RL, Di Micco R, Khabra K et al (2017) The potential role of three-dimensional surface imaging as a tool to evaluate aesthetic outcome after breast conserving therapy (BCT). Breast Cancer Res Treat 164(2):385–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4256-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee WY, Kim MJ, Lew DH, Song SY, Lee DW (2016) Three-dimensional surface imaging is an effective tool for measuring breast volume: a validation study. Arch Plast Surg 43(5):430–437. https://doi.org/10.5999/aps.2016.43.5.430

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Monton J, Torres A, Gijon M et al (2020) Use of symmetry assessment methods in the context of breast surgery. Aesthetic Plast Surg 44(5):1440–1451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-020-01755-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Henseler H, Smith J, Bowman A et al (2013) Subjective versus objective assessment of breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66(5):634–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2013.01.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. O’Connell RL, Khabra K, Bamber JC et al (2018) Validation of the Vectra XT three-dimensional imaging system for measuring breast volume and symmetry following oncological reconstruction. Breast Cancer Res Treat 171(2):391–398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4843-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Bai L, Lundström O, Johansson H et al (2022) Clinical assessment of breast symmetry and aesthetic outcome: can 3D imaging be the gold standard? J Plast Surg Hand Surg. https://doi.org/10.1080/2000656x.2021.2024553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Godden AR, Micha A, Wolf LM et al (2021) Three-dimensional simulation of aesthetic outcome from breast-conserving surgery compared with viewing photographs or standard care: randomized clinical trial. Br J Surg 108(10):1181–1188. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Alshehri SA, Singh SK, Mosahebi A, Kalaskar DM (2021) The current progress and critical analysis of three-dimensional scanning and three-dimensional printing applications in breast surgery. BJS Open. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab025

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakamura M, Mori H, Kubota M, Uemura N, Tanaka K (2021) Influence of marker number and position on accuracy of breast measurement with three-dimensional camera. Aesthetic Plast Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-021-02629-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Verhulst A, Hol M, Vreeken R, Becking A, Ulrich D, Maal T (2018) Three-dimensional imaging of the face: a comparison between three different imaging modalities. Aesthetic Surg J 38(6):579–585. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjx227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. de Vita R, Buccheri EM, Villanucci A, Ragusa LA (2019) Breast asymmetry, classification, and algorithm of treatment: our experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg 43(6):1439–1450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01489-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hartmann R, Weiherer M, Schiltz D et al (2021) New aspects in digital breast assessment: further refinement of a method for automated digital anthropometry. Arch Gynecol Obstet 303(3):721–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05862-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Reddy JP, Lei X, Huang SC et al (2017) Quantitative assessment of breast cosmetic outcome after whole-breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 97(5):894–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2016.12.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank all staff members at the Westmead Breast Institution who were involved in recruitment, obtaining the 2D and 3D photographs of all patients according to the standardised requirements, and measurements. The authors would like to particularly acknowledge Bronwyn Chalmers, Breast Clinical Nurse Consultant, for her tremendous support in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Westmead Breast Institute, Westmead, NSW, Australia

    My Pham, Robert Alzul, Elisabeth Elder, James French & Farid Meybodi

  2. Department of Engineering, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal

    Jaime Cardoso

  3. Department of Medical Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

    Ahmad Kaviani

Authors
  1. My Pham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert Alzul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elisabeth Elder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James French
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jaime Cardoso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ahmad Kaviani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Farid Meybodi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to My Pham.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical Approval

This study contains human participants and this study had ethical approval under the institution. For this study, informed consent was gained from every human participant.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pham, M., Alzul, R., Elder, E. et al. Evaluation of Vectra® XT 3D Surface Imaging Technology in Measuring Breast Symmetry and Breast Volume. Aesth Plast Surg 47, 1–7 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03087-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-022-03087-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation