View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Foundations and Guidelines for High-Quality Three-Dimensional Models Using Photogrammetry: A Technical Note on the Future of Neuroanatomy Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Foundations and Guidelines for High-Quality Three-Dimensional Models Using Photogrammetry: A Technical Note on the Future of Neuroanatomy Education
Language: English
Authors: Oliveira, André de Sá Braga (ORCID 0000-0001-7971-1275), Leonel, Luciano César P. C. (ORCID 0000-0002-8066-4055), LaHood, Edward R., Hallak, Hana (ORCID 0000-0002-8191-4175), Link, Michael J., Maleszewski, Joseph J., Pinheiro-Neto, Carlos D. (ORCID 0000-0003-3921-4658), Morris, Jonathan M. (ORCID 0000-0001-5035-3910), Peris-Celda, Maria (ORCID 0000-0002-9189-303X)
Source: Anatomical Sciences Education. Sep-Oct 2023 16(5):870-883.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 14
Publication Date: 2023
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Descriptors: Guidelines, Anatomy, Computer Simulation, Models, Photography, Measurement, Hands on Science, Laboratory Procedures, Human Body, Brain, Computer Software, Handheld Devices, Computers, Technology Uses in Education
DOI: 10.1002/ase.2274
ISSN: 1935-9772
1935-9780
Abstract: Hands-on dissections using cadaveric tissues for neuroanatomical education are not easily available in many educational institutions due to financial, safety, and ethical factors. Supplementary pedagogical tools, for instance, 3D models of anatomical specimens acquired with photogrammetry are an efficient alternative to democratize the 3D anatomical data. The aim of this study was to describe a technical guideline for acquiring realistic 3D anatomic models with photogrammetry and to improve the teaching and learning process in neuroanatomy. Seven specimens with different sizes, cadaveric tissues, and textures were used to demonstrate the step-by-step instructions for specimen preparation, photogrammetry setup, post-processing, and display of the 3D model. The photogrammetry scanning consists of three cameras arranged vertically facing the specimen to be scanned. In order to optimize the scanning process and the acquisition of optimal images, high-quality 3D models require complex and challenging adjustments in the positioning of the specimens within the scanner, as well as adjustments of the turntable, custom specimen holders, cameras, lighting, computer hardware, and its software. MeshLab® software was used for editing the 3D model before exporting it to MedReality® (Thyng, Chicago, IL) and SketchFab® (Epic, Cary, NC) platforms. Both allow manipulation of the models using various angles and magnifications and are easily accessed using mobile, immersive, and personal computer devices free of charge for viewers. Photogrammetry scans offer a 360° view of the 3D models ubiquitously accessible on any device independent of operating system and should be considered as a tool to optimize and democratize the teaching of neuroanatomy.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2023
Accession Number: EJ1391073
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGSWNQyafwYf_Yf8iRDYZjuAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCXUkSFVxubcSJZEfgIBEICBmomyvtgPtcKg0Ag_dRHCUT6sk3jgBbeuSg8lPquKL4tD-WD9azm2O08shjCKmqqaLDCDw8SK8V2zJmk3joyQSGXjevwT1ZmVk2DhKbbOPqnNRm-2vTOGUpC1EaD6Rp_X0wdWt_fJI2LMtN1VEjQo-uxu7jXWCMRPFyON2u-P0MzeOYYfC685hYs-GODBN0JPiXeaN6iRRHZU9a8=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0171369477;[8z8k]01sep.23;2023Sep06.06:34;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0171369477-1">Foundations and guidelines for high‐quality three‐dimensional models using photogrammetry: A technical note on the future of neuroanatomy education </title> <p>Hands‐on dissections using cadaveric tissues for neuroanatomical education are not easily available in many educational institutions due to financial, safety, and ethical factors. Supplementary pedagogical tools, for instance, 3D models of anatomical specimens acquired with photogrammetry are an efficient alternative to democratize the 3D anatomical data. The aim of this study was to describe a technical guideline for acquiring realistic 3D anatomic models with photogrammetry and to improve the teaching and learning process in neuroanatomy. Seven specimens with different sizes, cadaveric tissues, and textures were used to demonstrate the step‐by‐step instructions for specimen preparation, photogrammetry setup, post‐processing, and display of the 3D model. The photogrammetry scanning consists of three cameras arranged vertically facing the specimen to be scanned. In order to optimize the scanning process and the acquisition of optimal images, high‐quality 3D models require complex and challenging adjustments in the positioning of the specimens within the scanner, as well as adjustments of the turntable, custom specimen holders, cameras, lighting, computer hardware, and its software. MeshLab® software was used for editing the 3D model before exporting it to MedReality® (Thyng, Chicago, IL) and SketchFab® (Epic, Cary, NC) platforms. Both allow manipulation of the models using various angles and magnifications and are easily accessed using mobile, immersive, and personal computer devices free of charge for viewers. Photogrammetry scans offer a 360° view of the 3D models ubiquitously accessible on any device independent of operating system and should be considered as a tool to optimize and democratize the teaching of neuroanatomy.</p> <p>Keywords: 3D surface scanning; anatomy; education; medical education; neuroanatomy; photogrammetry</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-2">INTRODUCTION</hd> <p>Human anatomy has historically been considered an essential educational science for safe medical practice.[[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]] The first descriptions of the human body originated from cadaveric dissections in ancient Greece. Dissections have remained the core teaching tool in the history of anatomy.[[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref2">3</reflink>]] However, with the newly reformed curricula in most of the health science schools, the total hours allocated for basic sciences, especially anatomy and dissections were reduced. In addition, cadaver‐based anatomy may not be available in all institutions due to financial, safety, legal reasons, and ethical factors. These significant changes and issues added to the growth of new technologies triggered by the need for strategies that can offer a more dynamic anatomy teaching to maximize student's learning.[[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref3">5</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref4">7</reflink>]]</p> <p>One of the teaching strategies strongly allied to new technology is digital 3D modeling. There is a wide range of techniques to develop 3D models, including 3D segmentation of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, 3D printing from 3D segmented studies of cadaver specimens, plastination of cadaver specimens, injection molding from digital design, sectional photography series, and digital medical 3D illustration. Photogrammetry scans have been a less utilized technique for digital 3D reconstruction. The advantages, compared to 3D segmentation from MRI and CT pre‐acquired images, are display of realistic anatomical features, textures, and colors.[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref5">9</reflink>]</p> <p>The American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) describes photogrammetry as a technique to obtain precise information about the surface features of an object or a particular environment using a recording device which is not in direct contact with the object that is being studied.[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref6">10</reflink>] In the medical literature, the most advanced and common photogrammetry systems use a photography setup with cameras placed at various known angles and distances from the subject to be acquired. The pictures acquired then created a point cloud which is post‐processed and rendered by specific software applications creating a final 3D model that contains life‐size geometric information as well as the photorealistic appearance. The final 3D model can be displayed and manipulated on online platforms with viewers using mobile devices, personal computers, and immersive devices such as augmented and virtual reality.[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref7">11</reflink>]</p> <p>Currently, photogrammetry has been used for preoperative planning, postoperative evaluation, plastic surgery patient engagement, and most frequently for medical education.[[<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref8">12</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref9">14</reflink>]] Photogrammetry offers a unique experience to not only visualize a given model but also manipulate it freely in 3D space, as opposed to the classical 2D images found in textbooks and atlases.[[<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref10">15</reflink>]]</p> <p>Neuroanatomic studies have reported its effectiveness for 3D representations of cadaveric embalmed brains, and cerebral white matter connectivity to enhance neuroanatomy training using several electronic devices by different audiences.[[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref11">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref12">17</reflink>]]</p> <p>Furthermore, photogrammetry scans provide high‐quality 3D models which can be exported to online platforms and accessed several times simultaneously by different viewers manipulating them without damaging any structures. Thus, these interactive models allow the audience to experience depth and relational anatomy which is of paramount importance in skull‐base surgical approaches to cranial and para‐cranial regions.[[<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref13">13</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref14">19</reflink>]] Scaling photogrammetry in medicine has remained difficult, however, due to the needed technical capabilities of the operator, limited automated software, poor‐performing software, and limited medical‐specific ecosystems on the market.</p> <p>Therefore, the aim of this study is to describe a step‐by‐step guideline for high‐quality realistic three‐dimensional photogrammetry data acquisition, post‐processing, and display of the final 3D model to improve the teaching and learning processes in neuroanatomy.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-3">METHODS</hd> <p>This research was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Three types of specimens were studied: bony specimens, formalin‐fixed specimens with vascular colored‐latex injection, and formalin‐fixed specimens without vascular colored‐latex injection.</p> <p>Two dry skulls with axial section in the calvaria were used to evaluate the cranial base. One formalin‐fixed upper limb and one head specimen were latex‐injected and dissected following the guidelines previously described by this research group.[<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref15">21</reflink>] Photogrammetry scans were performed to register each step in the dissection technique (skin incision to bone exposure). In addition, three formalin‐fixed brains without latex injection were scanned in surface and then sliced (5 mm slices) in the coronal and axial planes using a sharp knife and cutting board (Figure 1). One embalmed brainstem with cerebellum was also studied.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Cadaveric specimens used in this study to standardize the photogrammetry technique. (A) A right upper limb was dissected and scanned from its subcutaneous layer to bone exposure; (B) One embalmed head was dissected exposing part of its skull base anatomy. The left hemisphere was sectioned above the anterior commissure and the lower part of the calcarine fissure exposing the gray and white matter. The right cerebral and cerebellar hemispheres were completely removed and the brainstem divided at the level of the mesencephalon. The rhomboid fossa was exposed. The superior part of the orbit was dissected demonstrating the course of neurovascular structures into the orbit. (C) Anterior view of a dry skull used to evaluate scans with non‐embalmed specimens; (D) Three embalmed brains were scanned. (E) To expose the medial view of the brain one specimen was sectioned in the sagittal plane; (F) One cerebellum with the brainstem and cranial nerves was also utilized. Two brains were sliced into an (G) axial and (H) coronal sections." /> </p> <p></p> <p>Each specimen was placed within the MedCreator scanner (MedReality®, Thyng, Chicago, IL, United States). Optimization of the preparation, scanning position, camera position, photographic parameters, lighting, scanning speed, rendering, post‐processing, and display of the final 3D model were recorded and described.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-5">RESULTS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0171369477-6">Photogrammetry: Equipment</hd> <p>The photogrammetry equipment consisted of a custom photogrammetry scanning solution with three cameras placed vertically at different angles, an in‐unit computer system, custom software purposely built with the sole purpose of acquiring and finally displaying medical digitally twinned anatomic and pathologic 3D models (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 Illustration representing the photogrammetry equipment. The photogrammetry setup used in this study was composed by a computer system with monitor, keyboard, and mouse connected to the scanner. Both systems were plugged to a power transformer. The scanner had three cameras placed vertically facing the specimen. Within the scanner, the lighting source was provided by four fluorescent lamps covered by a polarizing film placed laterally to the cameras and turned on during the entire scanning process. The specimens were positioned in front of the camera on a platform taking into account their size and weight. The platform was placed on a turntable which rotated the specimen clockwise at 360° while photos were taken. Markers served as a reference system for the final rendering process to create the 3D models by different software on the computer." /> </p> <p></p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0003.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0003.jpg" title="3 Scanner used in the study. (A, B) The scanner was composed by an heptagon box with its lid, a turntable, three cameras, and four lights. The cameras pointed at the specimen placed on a platform. The positioning of the specimens was important to set the ideal focus and frame for each one of the three cameras, therefore a 360° rotation using the turntable allowed to be photodocumented by the cameras. The lighting sources had a polarizing film to reduce glare and reflection. (C, D) Note the arrangement of the cameras and the polarizing filters on their lenses. The specimen was held by green spikes attached to a 3‐pin setup forming a triangle shape on the platform. The yellow markers served as a reference system for the Reality Capture software to recognize the key points of the photos taken to render the final 3D model properly." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0171369477-9">The scanner</hd> <p>The specimen was placed in the Medcreator scanner (MedReality®, Thyng, Chicago, IL, United States). The scanner was composed by a "box" and its lid, a turntable, three cameras, and four lighting sources (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-10">The "box"</hd> <p>The box housed the turntable, DSLR cameras, lighting source, and the specimen during the scanning. Its heptagon shape provided the functional working space with dimensions of 32 inches in diameter, 29 inches high, and 24.5 inches deep. The infrastructure was made of aluminum columns bordered by white plastic. This allowed proper white balancing of the cameras, and reflection of light from the flash to attenuate the shadows increasing the luminosity of the specimen which improved the rendering process and final 3D model. The box was mobile, so it was possible to store it or move it freely when in high‐volume use (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-11">The turntable</hd> <p>The turntable automatically rotated the specimen 360° clockwise inside the scanner while photos were being simultaneously taken by each camera. The 5.5‐inch turntable, located 17 inches from the cameras and level to the floor, was made of museum glass to be able to photograph through it using the inferior camera. It was also possible to rotate it counterclockwise to adjust the positioning of the specimen toward the cameras to assure that the entirety of the specimen fit in the camera's FOV before starting the scan. A full rotation allowed us to capture images to photodocument the specimen in its entirety rather than capturing one single plane that was facing the cameras when the scanning process started (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-12">The cameras</hd> <p>Three DSLR cameras (Canon EOS 80D Canon Inc.®, Tokyo, Japan) with 67 mm macrolens lens (Canon Lens Cap E‐ 67 II, Canon Inc.®, Tokyo, Japan) using polarization filters were arranged vertically, 8 inches apart from each other, and 15 inches away from the specimen. The distance from these cameras and a given specimen guaranteed the 360° photodocumentation for each one of them used in this study (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <p>The vertical angle of cameras was adjustable. It was recommended for small (e.g., brainstem and cerebellum, brain slices) and medium (e.g., brain and embalmed head) sized specimens to set the upper camera downwards at 45°, the middle camera in a neutral position at 0° facing the specimen, and the lower camera upwards at 45°. Both the vertical angle and the horizontal positioning of the cameras were variable between the specimens used and depended on the frame for each picture to be taken during the 360° rotation. The bigger the specimen (e.g., upper limb) the lower the chances of each camera to capture it entirely, so it was necessary to invest more time in zooming out than in the vertical and horizontal positioning of all cameras, in order not to compromise the resolution and rendering of the final 3D model.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-13">The lighting source</hd> <p>The lighting source was fixed and provided by four continuous fluorescent lights inside the scanner with two placed on each side of the cameras, with a wattage of 13 watts per tube and color temperature of 52,000 K. Constant lighting was important in order to avoid shadows in the pictures taken by each camera. The lighting sources were covered by a polarizing film to reduce reflection and glare to the camera lenses preserving the sharpness of the final images (Figures 2 and 3).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-14">Computer system and software</hd> <p>A desktop computer system (AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12—Core Processor 3.70 GHz, 32 GB RAM, using Windows 10 Pro) was connected to the scanner (Figure 2). It is recommended to use a machine with, at least, 1 TB of storage, 4 CPU cores, 16 GB of RAM, 1024 CUDA cores, and Windows 10. It is also very important to have a NVIDIA graphics card with CUDA 3.0+ capabilities, 1 GB VRAM and a CUDA Toolkit 10.2 (minimal driver version 441.22). In case the NVIDIA card is not present, it is still possible to run the application and register images, but not to create a textured mesh on Reality Capture software (Epic Games®, Cary, NC, United States). In total, three software packages were responsible for post‐processing and rendering the data collected by each camera within the scanner. The 3Dphoto49—INPROX Rotating System Studio 1.2.13.144 r (Inprox®, Gdansk, Poland) was important to adjust the turntable parameters depending on the specimen before scanning, and to rotate the specimen to capture different angles during the scanning process (Video S1). The Smart Shooter 4 (Tether Tools®, Phoenix, AZ, United States) adjusts the camera settings (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, zoom, autofocus) before scanning, giving a live preview of what was being captured by each camera. Lastly, the Reality Capture software (Epic Games®, Cary, NC, United States) automatically received and rendered the images into a 3D model. This was the final software responsible for rendering the 'raw' 3D model which was transferred to editing software, MeshLab®,[<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref16">22</reflink>] before being displayed in online platforms. All software and hardware were provided with the installation of the MedCreator scanner (MedReality®, Thyng, Chicago, IL, United States).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-15">Photogrammetry: Technical overview (Video S1)</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0171369477-16">Placement of the equipment</hd> <p>The scanner and computer system were placed on a flat surface, in a quiet room to avoid sudden movements which could compromise the scanning process. Once the scanner lid was closed and ready to acquire pictures, walking around the equipment or equipment manipulation was avoided. Any walking, hitting, or vibrations near the scanner could be transmitted to the specimen and compromise the quality of the images captured by the cameras. Room lighting did not interfere with the images as the scanner was closed during the scanning process.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-17">Placing the specimen within the scanner: Specimen holding and positioning</hd> <p>The specimens were placed directly on the turntable or held by different platforms such as metal pins with plastic spikes or a clear museum glass plate. The most important factor to decide which platform to hold a given specimen was its tissue composition (hard or soft tissue) and its dimensions (Figure 4). Embalmed specimens and soft tissues were dried and cleaned in order to avoid reflection during the scanning.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0004.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0004.jpg" title="4 Holding and positioning of the specimens. (A) A circular base with multiple holes was the platform most used for holding each specimen. (B) A 3‐pin configuration was used to hold the specimen with an arrangement resembling a triangle. Markers were placed on the top of each pin to orient the Reality Capture software during the rendering process. (C) The glass plate with suction cups was used for small specimens including the cerebellum articulated with the brainstem and most importantly brain slices (coronal and axial planes). (D) The spikes attached on top of each marker offered a safe and steady placement of the dry skull, as well as the embalmed head." /> </p> <p></p> <p>The area of maximal interest in the specimen was placed perpendicular to the middle camera. Following the positioning, three plastic markers were placed surrounding the lower portion of the specimen regardless of the mounting setup chosen to hold it. These markers were essential at coregistering the model, providing scale, and guiding the Reality Capture software (Epic Games®, Cary, NC, United States) during the rendering process of the photographed specimen. The markers were placed either on the top of each pin or surrounding the platform where the specimen was seating, always arranged to form a triangle shape (Figures 3 and 4).</p> <p>The 3‐pin configuration was used for the embalmed head and the dry skulls by mounting the pins on a platform as shown in Figures 3 and 4, along with plastic spikes. The pins let the specimen "float" within the scanner which allowed the lower camera to capture its inferior features during the scanning. It is noteworthy that when placing the specimen in a flat platform (rather than a clear plate) covering its inferior aspect, the lower camera is not able to photograph it, consequently, this information is "lost" during the rendering process.</p> <p>It was also possible to use the 3‐pin configuration by mounting the pins along with small suction cups holding a clear museum‐quality glass plate. This configuration offered a secure surface to hold the brains and their respective parts (e.g., slices and brainstem with cerebellum). In addition, specimens such as an upper limb which was too big and heavy to be positioned using the pins configuration were placed directly on the platform.</p> <p>The positioning and placement of a specimen within the scanner play a crucial role to acquire accurate, life size, 3D models with the highest fidelity. The more surface geometry of the given anatomy the three cameras are able to capture, the better the rendering process will be. Even though the spikes have the advantage of being interpreted and removed easily during the post‐process of the final 3D model they can damage soft specimens such as the brain and brainstem. In these cases, the clear glass plate with suction cups must be considered, as shown in Figure 4. The glass plate was used for brain slices but it could also be used for specimens composed by harder tissues (e.g., dry skull).</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-19">Camera and lighting considerations</hd> <p>After positioning the specimen on the turntable and checking its alignment toward the cameras, the focus, and additional settings were manually adjusted while mirroring their image on the computer screen using the Smart Shooter 4 software (Figure 5, Video S1). The zoom and framing were set up to allow the specimen to be completely captured by each camera after rotating 360°. The better the specimen framing in 360°, the greater the data resolution in the final images.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0005.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0005.jpg" title="5 Camera overview and focus adjustments. (A) The Smart Shooter 4 software provided a live view of the active camera. All parameters (aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focus) were adjusted before scanning (yellow rectangle). To adjust the focus for each camera, the green square in the "Live View" mode (pink rectangle) was dragged to a given structure where the focus would be set. Focusing on areas with refined details improved the 3D model resolution. These steps were repeated for the other two cameras. (B) To start scanning using the INPROX software, the 'capture tab' (red rectangle) was pressed to adjust the final camera settings; time of exposure was set to 2.2 s (gray rectangle), with 60 frames (pictures) for each camera (blue rectangle) and lastly, the icon 'Start' (black rectangle) was pressed. The scanning process under such settings took approximately 6 min to be completed." /> </p> <p></p> <p>For each camera, the focus was set up by selecting a given point/structure in the specimen. The focus could be set on a particular structure to emphasize its anatomy in the final 3D model disregarding the rest of the specimen, or covering the entire specimen in order to have its overview with a reasonable focus, and consequently, better resolution. The surface selected could either be the same for the three cameras or each camera could focus on a different area/structure. For instance, to have an overview of the embalmed head its focus was set on three different neuroanatomical structures with cameras facing the orbit, brain, and cranial nerves, respectively, which adjusted the resolution of the final 3D model. Once the zoom and focus were set, they remained the same during the scanning process as long as there was no sudden movement outside the scanner displacing the specimen.</p> <p>Based on previous results of this study, shutter speed, and aperture were the same for all specimens (<emph>f</emph>/8 and 1/60, respectively). Due to the size of the specimens and tissue composition ISO was adjusted to 400 for the skull and the brain, and 800 for the embalmed head and arm to improve their brightness during the scanning process.</p> <p>No flash was attached to the cameras given the constant light source described above. Finally, when preparing the cameras, it was important to manually rotate the circular polarization filters on each of them to minimize reflection and glare during the photodocumentation.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-21">Setting up the computer system and scanning process</hd> <p>Before scanning, it is important to ensure that the required software on the computer was installed and working. The software runs simultaneously in order to capture the images taken by each camera in real‐time. The Smart Shooter 4 displays a live view screen making it possible to check the settings previously established with the scanner still opened or change any other features regarding focus and lighting (Figure 5).</p> <p>The 3Dphoto49—INPROX Rotating System Studio 1.2.13.144 r adjusted the final number of pictures to be taken and time of exposure (Figure 5, Video S1). To fully capture the whole surface of the specimens, photos were taken every 6° of rotation, therefore, 60 photos were taken by each camera with the turntable rotating every 2.2 s. The scanning process took approximately 6 min per session. The number of pictures to be taken was adjustable and it was related to the size and complexity of the given specimen to be scanned. Considering different trials performed during the scanning process with different numbers of pictures taken, a final number of 180 pictures (60 pictures per camera) proved to be the best setting especially for big specimens such as the upper limb, embalmed head, and brain guaranteeing a final 3D model with high quality and resolution. High‐quality 3D models can be achieved for smaller specimens (e.g., brainstem, brain slices, etc.) with 120–150 photos.</p> <p>The images taken by the cameras were automatically transferred to a folder on the computer. The Reality Capture software (Epic Games, Cary, NC, United States) allowed the operator to visualize the progress during scanning. By the end of the scanning session, each scan produced three files: a wavefront 3D object file in.obj format, which is a standard 3D image format that can be exported and opened by different 3D image editing software, its associated material file (.mtl), and its associated texture file (.jpg). All three files (.obj,.mtl,.jpg) are required to start editing and rendering the 3D model. The.obj is the geometric mesh file. The.mtl is an associated file containing definitions of surface materials and calls on the.jpg file to give the mesh color and texture.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-22">Preliminary view and post‐process settings</hd> <p>After scanning the specimen the final.obj files were exported to MeshLab®.[<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref17">22</reflink>] This is a preliminary software where the "raw" 3D model could be visualized in detail, edited with filters, and post‐processed to further improve it in order to be displayed (Video S2). During the post‐processing, the holding devices (3‐pins with spikes/suction cups, and clear glass plate), as well as any additional artifacts captured in the 3D scan during the photodocumentation were removed.</p> <p>Following the editing process and before exporting and displaying the final 3D model it was important to consider its "face" units (single unit of a rendered 3D model, similar to a pixel in a picture) or number of triangles and how this feature would impact the final display and interactivity on a given platform or device. Initially, 3D models were rendered and exported with approximately three to four million face units, however, this size mesh compromised not only the uploading process, but also their display, they tended to be difficult to move and interact on the platforms due to its size. By reducing the models to a face decimation of 500,000 face units, there was a visible decrease in resolution, sharpness, and quality. Therefore, after several attempts, it was noticed that reducing to one million face units both quality and resolution were preserved for all specimens without compromising their interactivity on the platforms.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-23">Displaying the final model: MedReality And SketchFab platforms</hd> <p>The final 3D model was exported, displayed, and hosted using two different online platforms. The first one, the MedReality® platform, was accessible for viewers using any type of personal device including a personal computer, web browser, tablet, immersive device, or mobile phone. This platform organized the models into different hierarchical folders, allowing data sharing with different organizations within the institution (for instance, Pathology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, ENT, etc.), outside institutions, and presented settings to display the model using stereoscopic view with a 3D projector and 3D glasses on a white screen or wall (Figure 6 and Video S3).</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/8Z8K/01sep23/ase2274-fig-0006.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="ase2274-fig-0006.jpg" title="6 Displaying the final 3D model: MedReality® and SketchFab® platforms. (A) MedReality is a platform easily accessed where the models can be organized into folders (channels). (B) It is possible to access them with a mobile device via a website link or a QR code. The platform allowed free manipulation of the object, rotating, zooming in and out from different angles and magnifications. (C) SketchFab®, just like described for the previous platform, is accessed by a web link or QR code supporting virtual and augmented realities. This platform supported the uploading, downloading, and editing of 3D models. (D) 3D model of an axial section of an embalmed brain. (E) 3D model of a skull base dissection of an embalmed head. Note the mapping and labeling of anatomical structures. In this model, the cranial nerves were enumerated from I to XII." /> </p> <p></p> <p>The SketchFab® platform had features already described for the MedReality®, such as free access using stationary and portable devices, as well as organization of models into folders named as "collections." However, this platform acted not only as a place to display your model, but also to edit it using its commands and post‐process settings to remove shading, change the background, and adjust lighting and sharpness which improved the 3D model directly on the platform without using other software. The platform allows labeling and the ability to add comments to the anatomic structures on the models which can then be downloaded by learners. This allows the teacher to guide the student through critical anatomy. This feature is of paramount importance, especially when studying the model by oneself (Figure 6 and Video S4).</p> <p>To access the models on both platforms a web link or QR code can be generated and shared with a selected audience during a given in‐person or remote lecture and national and international meetings and conferences. Both platforms offered free and paid plans depending on the needs of each user/company and numbers of models to be uploaded.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-25">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>The photogrammetry scanning technique has been already described to measure anatomical structures and collect metric data of pathways of white matter in the brain,[[<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref18">23</reflink>]] while others authors have used it for clinical purposes comparing normal and diseased brains recognizing gyral atrophy.[[<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref19">25</reflink>]]</p> <p>Several studies have shown that photogrammetry scans provide realistic 3D models for neuroanatomic education maintaining and stressing their superficial features, textures, and shapes, This contrasts with other surface scanning options such as laser 3D scanning which can obtain the geometry of the object but does not capture photorealism or texture maps. However, studies describing and evaluating both the accuracy and applicability of photogrammetry scans and high‐quality 3D models in the neuroanatomy education are lacking.[[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref20">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref21">27</reflink>]]</p> <p>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study establishing detailed reproducible guidelines and optimization of three‐dimensional models acquired with photogrammetry techniques to further enhance the teaching and learning process of neuroanatomy education. In this manuscript, a detailed technical description from the specimen preparation to post‐process settings and display of these models on cloud‐based online platforms was highlighted emphasizing its advantages, challenges, and most common mistakes when performing the technique.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-26">Advantages</hd> <p>The use of photogrammetry scanning technique for education purposes has many appealing factors. First, it offers the fastest and most efficient way to create a photorealistic life‐size digital twin of the anatomic or pathologic tissue, surpassing artistic created computerized models from digital images. Second, it has realistic texture maps that cannot be obtained during the creation of 3D models from segmented cross‐sectional images. Third, it is more cost‐effective than plastination and requires less infrastructure and given the MedCreator system, less technical capabilities of the operator. Fourth, although we have co‐created a custom photogrammetry system, an institution could purchase the necessary hardware and software, all currently available on the market, to begin to create their own anatomic replicas. Finally, and possibly most important, once the 3D models are created, they are displayed digitally and cloud‐based, making them accessible to wide ranges of audiences, which is not possible with physical specimens.[<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref22">14</reflink>] These 3D models allow many forms of interaction on personal CPU, mobile devices, and immersive environments offering visuospatial engagement that 2D pictures and videos are not able to provide.</p> <p>The use of 3D anatomic models in medical education has allowed the exploration of anatomy in a more realistic, reproducible, and effective way.[[<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref23">29</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref24">31</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref25">33</reflink>]] Students, mentors, and healthcare works have the convenience of accessing these models anywhere with a personal device. In fact, many private institutions and universities have been using this technology to create digital libraries and improve the anatomical and surgical education by using different digital platforms.[[<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref26">35</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref27">37</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref28">39</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref29">41</reflink>]] Photogrammetry‐acquired 3D data is beginning to be included in slide presentations during meetings and congresses in several areas of neurosciences to supplement and improve lectures, conferences, and the experience during residency.[[<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref30">43</reflink>]]</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-27">Challenges</hd> <p>Several photogrammetry setups have been used to render multiple 2D pictures acquired with a multi‐camera arrangement in a final 3D model. A multi‐camera setup, in which more than one camera is used to photodocument the specimen/object is indeed more expensive and complex than a single‐camera setup, however, when using only one camera, the process is more time‐consuming, requiring complicated equations and sophisticated software for 3D reconstruction.[[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref31">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref32">26</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref33">45</reflink>]] The arrangement with three cameras used in the present study is more feasible for the acquisition of data for neuroanatomy education since the specimens could be easily scanned and rendered in less than 30 min allowing up to 16 specimens a day to be scanned. Current smartphones and tablets have the ability to take photogrammetry scans using app‐based software. Nevertheless, their final 3D models are less spatially accurate and the final files lack the resolution, surface texture, and accuracy when compared to those acquired using a multiple‐camera setup.[[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref34">9</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref35">14</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref36">46</reflink>]] DSLR cameras setup do not have this deficit.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-28">Common mistakes</hd> <p>In this study, the scanner used presented a multi‐camera arrangement with variable focal length lenses. These lenses required manual adjustments to guarantee the same focus for each picture taken in every scan performed. A different setup with fixed focal lenses could be used due to the fact that these lenses do not require any adjustment before the scanning process, however, they would maintain the same point of focus regardless of the specimen and its dimensions limiting the flexibility to focus on other structures. Furthermore, during the photodocumentation within the scanner, when photographing shiny or reflective specimens composed of different layers of soft tissue such as subcutaneous tissue and muscles and neurovascular structures, a circular polarizing filter in front of the lenses is highly recommended. This filter reduced the extra brightness caused by reflection on those spots where the specimens are moistened, being manually adjusted before the scanning begins.[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref37">11</reflink>]</p> <p>In addition to the polarizing filters, the exposure and lighting settings play an important role during the scanning and post‐process steps when photodocumenting different specimens.[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref38">11</reflink>] Specimens with smooth and reflective surfaces (e.g., upper limb and embalmed head) tend to reflect more light than those composed mostly by hard tissues (e.g., dry skull). The cameras comprehended these spots of reflection as an "overexposed" surface which automatically led them to "compensate" the extra brightness by creating shadows and darker images (neutral gray background). To avoid such problem, manual adjustment in the exposure time was required and the specimens should not be moistened prior to image capture.[[<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref39">14</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref40">47</reflink>]] In this study, both the upper limb and embalmed head had their ISO settings adjusted from 400 (used with the other specimens) to 800 in order to capture brighter images due to the camera interpretation to reflective surfaces.</p> <p>Even though, it was already reported in the literature that the most ideal field of depth was provided with an aperture close to <emph>f</emph>/16 and shutter speed of 1/50th of a second,[<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref41">49</reflink>] in this study after testing different aperture and shutter speed settings among different specimens, we observed that settings of <emph>f</emph>/8 and 1/60 respectively, were the optimal values to create high‐quality 3D models guaranteeing resolution and details to the final model. Both settings guaranteed the best resolution and brightness for the final 3d model and must be adjusted manually because their value depends on the specimens used during the scans, their singularities and dimensions, and their respective lighting and brightness during the scan.</p> <p>When it comes to the number of pictures, different studies have suggested a minimum of 30 images per camera to create a final model with high resolution. The number of photos must be considered taking into account the specimens to be scanned and its size, dimensions, and complexity.[[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref42">11</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref43">13</reflink>]] The bigger and more complex the specimen is, the more pictures will be required to create its 3D model representing its features and details. In this study 180 pictures (60 images per photo) guaranteed a final 3D model presenting a high‐quality and optimal resolution for specimens as the upper limb and embalmed head, therefore such values were set for each one of the other specimens even though they were smaller and not always as complex in details and anatomy as the upper limb or embalmed head.</p> <p>The number of pictures and the angle of rotation of the turntable play a crucial role during the capture of data in the scanning process. It is important to set the specimens so the scan captures enough data to render and overlap these images in a final realistic textured 3D model. In the present study, every 2.2 s 3 pictures were taken (one image per camera) while the turntable rotated 6°. During the rendering process, the software recognized the similar points in each image overlapping them at least in 50%–60%.[<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref44">46</reflink>]</p> <p>In order to improve the rendering process, blurry and unfocused pictures must be removed from the data. The images can also be post‐processed before the rendering process starts using editing software (e.g., Adobe Photoshop) in order to improve the background of the images removing artifacts, thus reducing time during the rendering process as well as to optimizing their colors and balance of the images, resulting in a more accurate 3D reconstruction and more detailed model texture as they usually lead to an inconsistent photo‐alignment.[<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref45">11</reflink>] The present study did not discard any photos or use an additional editing software to mask or improve the photos because these post‐processing steps were automatically performed by the Reality Capture software.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-29">Limitations and future directions</hd> <p>The introduction of high‐quality 3D models acquired by photogrammetry is still a challenge due to technical guidance and cost limitations.[<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref46">13</reflink>]</p> <p>One of the main technical limitations of the study is the dimensions of the photogrammetry machine as specimens larger than an upper limb could not be placed nor scanned with the current setup. Additionally, this manuscript did not address the educational impact and feedback of the 3D models acquired among platform users, which undoubtedly would provide valuable information. Future studies should focus on comparing and evaluating user friendliness and feedback among multiple users in different platforms. Demonstration of the educational value with potentially greater or faster learning process needs validation and comparison among groups of learners exposed to photogrammetry‐acquired data versus other educational resources. This may be especially relevant in dissections with a high level of three‐dimensional complexity.</p> <p>Despite all limitations, the authors strongly believe that photogrammetry‐acquired data would be a valuable resource to be introduced in the curricula of universities and residency programs to improve the learning curve of residents and trainees.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-30">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>In this study, a step‐by‐step reproducible optimized guideline is described to produce 3D models of neuroanatomy specimens with photogrammetry scanning techniques. The interactive high‐resolution models can be freely manipulated in 3D space by any user, in any geographic location, and on any personal device using the two distribution software companies MedReality and SketchFab. This system democratizes neuroanatomic knowledge from large centers with more resources to smaller centers around the globe that do not have access to this capture technology, dissection techniques, or cadaveric or pathologic tissue for study. Despite its intrinsic limitations, photogrammetry can create high‐quality 3D models, and can progressively be utilized to improve the education process in residency programs and be used in clinical and surgical practices. This manuscript provides the foundations for new studies using a uniform technique, that we project will become a standard methodology in the near future.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-31">ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</hd> <p>The authors wish to thank Dr. Giuseppe Lanzino and the families of the donors who generously donated their bodies to the Anatomy Department at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, EUA.</p> <hd id="AN0171369477-32">FUNDING INFORMATION</hd> <p>Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota and the Joseph and Barbara Ashkins Endowed Professorship in Surgery and the Radiology Department, Mayo Clinic, Rochester Minnesota.</p> <p>GRAPH: Video S1</p> <p>GRAPH: Video S2</p> <p>GRAPH: Video S3</p> <p>GRAPH: Video S4</p> <ref id="AN0171369477-33"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> André de Sá Braga Oliveira and Luciano César P. C. Leonel contributed equally to the manuscript and are the first co‐authors.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Jonathan M. Morris and Maria Peris‐Celda are senior co‐authors.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0171369477-34"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibtext> Verhoeven BH, Verwijnen GM, Scherpbier AJ, van der Vleuten CP. Growth of medical knowledge. Med Educ. 2002 ; 36 : 711 – 7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365‐2923.2002.01268.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yammine K. The current status of anatomy knowledge: where are we now? Where do we need to go and how do we get there? Teach Learn Med. 2014 ; 26 : 184 – 8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2014.883985</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref2" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Ghosh SK. Human cadaveric dissection: a historical account from ancient Greece to the modern era. Anat Cell Biol. 2015 ; 48 : 153 – 69. https://doi.org/10.5115/acb.2015.48.3.153</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Sallam HN. The ancient Alexandria school of medicine. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2002 ; 30 : 3 – 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1297‐9589(01)00254‐5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref3" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Azer SA, Eizenberg N. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem‐based learning medical course? Perceptions of first‐ and second‐year students. Surg Radiol Anat. 2007 ; 29 : 173 – 80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276‐007‐0180‐x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Johnson EO, Charchanti AV, Troupis TG. Modernization of an anatomy class: from conceptualization to implementation. A case for integrated multimodal‐multidisciplinary teaching. Anat Sci Educ. 2012 ; 5 : 354 – 66. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1296</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref4" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Lim KH, Loo ZY, Goldie SJ, Adams JW, McMenamin PG. Use of 3D printed models in medical education: a randomized control trial comparing 3D prints versus cadaveric materials for learning external cardiac anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2016 ; 9 : 213 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1573</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Raja DS, Sultana B. Potential health hazards for students exposed to formaldehyde in the gross anatomy laboratory. J Environ Health. 2012 ; 74 : 36 – 40.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref5" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gurses ME, Gungor A, Hanalioglu S, Yaltirik CK, Postuk HC, Berker M, et al. Qlone®: a simple method to create 360‐degree photogrammetry‐based 3‐dimensional model of cadaveric specimens. Oper Neurosurg. 2021 ; 21 : E488 – 93. https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opab355</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smelser NJ, Baltes PB. International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences. 1st ed. Amsterdam : Elsevier ; 2001.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Struck R, Cordoni S, Aliotta S, Pérez‐Pachón L, Gröning F. Application of photogrammetry in biomedical science. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2019 ; 1120 : 121 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐030‐06070‐1_10</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bois MC, Morris JM, Boland JM, Larson NL, Scharrer EF, Aubry MC, et al. Three‐dimensional surface imaging and printing in anatomic pathology. J Pathol Inform. 2021 ; 12 : 22. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpi.jpi_8_21</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicolosi F, Spena G. Three‐dimensional virtual intraoperative reconstruction: a novel method to explore a virtual neurosurgical field. World Neurosurg. 2020 ; 137 : e189 – 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.112</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Petriceks AH, Peterson AS, Angeles M, Brown WP, Srivastava S. Photogrammetry of human specimens: an innovation in anatomy education. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2018 ; 5 : 2382120518799356. https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120518799356</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berney S, Bétrancourt M, Molinari G, Hoyek N. How spatial abilities and dynamic visualizations interplay when learning functional anatomy with 3D anatomical models. Anat Sci Educ. 2015 ; 8 : 452 – 62. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1524</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Park S, Kim Y, Park S, Shin JA. The impacts of three‐dimensional anatomical atlas on learning anatomy. Anat Cell Biol. 2019 ; 52 : 76 – 81. https://doi.org/10.5115/acb.2019.52.1.76</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> De Benedictis A, Nocerino E, Menna F, Remondino F, Barbareschi M, Rozzanigo U, et al. Photogrammetry of the human brain: a novel method for three‐dimensional quantitative exploration of the structural connectivity in neurosurgery and neurosciences. World Neurosurg. 2018 ; 115 : e279 – 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2018.04.036</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Roh TH, Oh JW, Jang CK, Choi S, Kim EH, Hong CK, et al. Virtual dissection of the real brain: integration of photographic 3D models into virtual reality and its effect on neurosurgical resident education. Neurosurg Focus. 2021 ; 51 : E16. https://doi.org/10.3171/2021.5.Focus21193</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaczyńska AE, Kosiński A, Bobkowska K, Zajączkowski MA, Kamiński R, Piwko GM, et al. Clinical anatomy of the spatial structure of the right ventricular outflow tract. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2022 ; 31 : 33 – 40. https://doi.org/10.17219/acem/131752</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liaw CY, Guvendiren M. Current and emerging applications of 3D printing in medicine. Biofabrication. 2017 ; 9 : 024102. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758‐5090/aa7279</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leonel LCP, Carlstrom LP, Graffeo CS, Perry A, Pinheiro‐Neto CD, Sorenson J, et al. Foundations of advanced neuroanatomy: technical guidelines for specimen preparation, dissection, and 3D‐photodocumentation in a surgical anatomy laboratory. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2021 ; 82 : e248 – 58. https://doi.org/10.1055/s‐0039‐3399590</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Callieri M, Dellepiane M, Ranzuglia G, Cignoni P, Scopigno R. MeshLab as a complete open tool for the integration of photos and color with high‐resolution 3D geometry data. Comput Appl Quant Methods Archaeol. 2011 ; XLII‐2/W4 : 406 – 16.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nocerino E, Menna F, Remondino F, Sarubbo S, Benedictis AD, Chioffi F, et al. Application of photogrammetry to brain anatomy. Int Arch Photogramm Remote Sens Spat Inf Sci. 2017 ; 42 : 213 – 9.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tunali SJN. Digital photogrammetry in neuroanatomy. Neuroanatomy. 2008 ; 7 : 47 – 8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dirven R, Hilgers FJ, Plooij JM, Maal TJ, Bergé SJ, Verkerke GJ, et al. 3D stereophotogrammetry for the assessment of tracheostoma anatomy. Acta Otolaryngol. 2008 ; 128 : 1248 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016480801901717</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shintaku H, Yamaguchi M, Toru S, Kitagawa M, Hirokawa K, Yokota T, et al. Three‐dimensional surface models of autopsied human brains constructed from multiple photographs by photogrammetry. PLoS ONE. 2019 ; 14 : e0219619. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219619</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dixit I, Kennedy S, Piemontesi J, Kennedy B, Krebs C. Which tool is best: 3D scanning or photogrammetry—it depends on the task. In: Rea PM, editor. Biomedical visualisation: volume 1. Cham : Springer International Publishing ; 2019. p. 107 – 19.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Evin A, Souter T, Hulme‐Beaman A, Ameen C, Allen R, Viacava P, et al. The use of close‐range photogrammetry in zooarchaeology: creating accurate 3D models of wolf crania to study dog domestication. J Archaeol Sci Rep. 2016 ; 9 : 87 – 93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.06.028</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> D'Ambrosio AL, Mocco J, Hankinson TC, Bruce JN, van Loveren HR. Quantification of the frontotemporal orbitozygomatic approach using a three‐dimensional visualization and modeling application. Neurosurgery. 2008 ; 62 : 251 – 60. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000317401.38960.f6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kockro RA, Amaxopoulou C, Killeen T, Wagner W, Reisch R, Schwandt E, et al. Stereoscopic neuroanatomy lectures using a three‐dimensional virtual reality environment. Ann Anat. 2015 ; 201 : 91 – 8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2015.05.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Martins C, Ribas EC, Rhoton AL Jr, Ribas GC. Three‐dimensional digital projection in neurosurgical education: technical note. J Neurosurg. 2015 ; 123 : 1077 – 80. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.10.JNS13542</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mashiko T, Kaneko N, Konno T, Otani K, Nagayama R, Watanabe E. Training in cerebral aneurysm clipping using self‐made 3‐dimensional models. J Surg Educ. 2017 ; 74 : 681 – 9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.12.010</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oishi M, Fukuda M, Hiraishi T, Yajima N, Sato Y, Fujii Y. Interactive virtual simulation using a 3D computer graphics model for microvascular decompression surgery. J Neurosurg. 2012 ; 117 : 555 – 65. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.5.Jns112334</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schirmer CM, Elder JB, Roitberg B, Lobel DA. Virtual reality‐based simulation training for ventriculostomy: an evidence‐based approach. Neurosurgery. 2013 ; 73 (Suppl 1): 66 – 73. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000000074</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bernardo A. Virtual reality and simulation in neurosurgical training. World Neurosurg. 2017 ; 106 : 1015 – 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.06.140</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clark AD, Barone DG, Candy N, Guilfoyle M, Budohoski K, Hofmann R, et al. The effect of 3‐dimensional simulation on neurosurgical skill acquisition and surgical performance: a review of the literature. J Surg Educ. 2017 ; 74 : 828 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.02.007</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gasco J, Holbrook TJ, Patel A, Smith A, Paulson D, Muns A, et al. Neurosurgery simulation in residency training: feasibility, cost, and educational benefit. Neurosurgery. 2013 ; 73 (Suppl 1): 39 – 45. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000000102</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kirkman MA, Ahmed M, Albert AF, Wilson MH, Nandi D, Sevdalis N. The use of simulation in neurosurgical education and training. A systematic review. J Neurosurg. 2014 ; 121 : 228 – 46. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.5.Jns131766</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Konakondla S, Fong R, Schirmer CM. Simulation training in neurosurgery: advances in education and practice. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017 ; 8 : 465 – 73. https://doi.org/10.2147/amep.S113565</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicolosi F, Rossini Z, Zaed I, Kolias AG, Fornari M, Servadei F. Neurosurgical digital teaching in low‐middle income countries: beyond the frontiers of traditional education. Neurosurg Focus. 2018 ; 45 : E17. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.7.Focus18288</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pujol S, Baldwin M, Nassiri J, Kikinis R, Shaffer K. Using 3D modeling techniques to enhance teaching of difficult anatomical concepts. Acad Radiol. 2016 ; 23 : 507 – 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2015.12.012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rehder R, Abd‐El‐Barr M, Hooten K, Weinstock P, Madsen JR, Cohen AR. The role of simulation in neurosurgery. Childs Nerv Syst. 2016 ; 32 : 43 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381‐015‐2923‐z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gonzalez NR, Dusick JR, Martin NA. Effects of mobile and digital support for a structured, competency‐based curriculum in neurosurgery residency education. Neurosurgery. 2012 ; 71 : 164 – 72. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0b013e318253571b</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stienen MN, Schaller K, Cock H, Lisnic V, Regli L, Thomson S. eLearning resources to supplement postgraduate neurosurgery training. Acta Neurochir. 2017 ; 159 : 325 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701‐016‐3042‐7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Habib A, Detchev I, Kwak E. Stability analysis for a multi‐camera photogrammetric system. Sensors. 2014 ; 14 : 15084 – 112. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140815084</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hernandez A, Lemaire E. A smartphone photogrammetry method for digitizing prosthetic socket interiors. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2017 ; 41 : 210 – 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364616664150</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graham CA, Akoglu KG, Lassen AW, Simon S. Epic dimensions: a comparative analysis of 3D acquisition methods. Gottingen : Copernicus GmbH ; 2017. p. 287 – 93.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marčiš M. Quality of 3D models generated by SFM. Dent Tech. 2013 ; 21 : 13 – 24. https://doi.org/10.2478/sjce‐2013‐0017</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Villa C, Flies MJ, Jacobsen C. Forensic 3D documentation of bodies: simple and fast procedure for combining CT scanning with external photogrammetry data. J Forensic Radiol Imaging. 2018 ; 12 : e2 – 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jofri.2017.11.003</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By André de Sá Braga de Oliveira; Luciano César P. C. Leonel; Edward R. LaHood; Hana Hallak; Michael J. Link; Joseph J. Maleszewski; Carlos D. Pinheiro‐Neto; Jonathan M. Morris and Maria Peris‐Celda</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>André de Sá Braga Oliveira, Ph.D. is a professor of anatomy in the Department of Morphology at Federal University of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil. He teaches anatomy to first‐year medical students. His research interest is in medical education and neurosurgical anatomy.</p> <p>Luciano César P. C. Leonel, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor of neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. He works in a surgical anatomy laboratory and has interest in teaching open and expanded endonasal approaches to the skull base and nasal cavity.</p> <p>Edward R. LaHood, Ph.D. is the CEO of Thyng, LCC, and MainCloud. His research interests focus on optimizing medical education with 3D models, virtual reality, and augmented reality.</p> <p>Hana Hallak is a medical and a research fellow of Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. She works in a surgical anatomy laboratory and has an interest in open and expanded endonasal approaches to the skull base and nasal cavity.</p> <p>Michael J. Link, MD, Ph.D. is a Professor of Neuroanatomy and Otolaryngology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. He teaches and has experience with neurosurgery and expanded endonasal approaches to the skull base.</p> <p>Joseph J. Maleszewski, M.D. is a Professor of Laboratory Medicine & Pathology and Professor of Medicine in the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science. He is also the Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs for the Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine. His primary academic interests include the genetics and proteomics of cardiomyopathies and cardiovascular neoplasia. Other interests include photogrammetry and specimen modeling.</p> <p>Carlos D. Pinheiro‐Neto, MD, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Otolaryngology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. He has experience with expanded endonasal approaches to the skull base.</p> <p>Jonathan M. Morris, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. He has experience with imaging analyses.</p> <p>Maria Peris‐Celda, MD, Ph.D is an Associate Professor of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester‐MN. She is the PI of the 'Mayo Clinic Rhoton Neurosurgery and Otolaryngology Surgical Anatomy Program'. She teaches and has experience with open and expanded endonasal approaches to the skull base.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref41"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1391073
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Foundations and Guidelines for High-Quality Three-Dimensional Models Using Photogrammetry: A Technical Note on the Future of Neuroanatomy Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Oliveira%2C+André+de+Sá+Braga%22">Oliveira, André de Sá Braga</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7971-1275">0000-0001-7971-1275</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Leonel%2C+Luciano+César+P%2E+C%2E%22">Leonel, Luciano César P. C.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8066-4055">0000-0002-8066-4055</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22LaHood%2C+Edward+R%2E%22">LaHood, Edward R.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Hallak%2C+Hana%22">Hallak, Hana</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8191-4175">0000-0002-8191-4175</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Link%2C+Michael+J%2E%22">Link, Michael J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Maleszewski%2C+Joseph+J%2E%22">Maleszewski, Joseph J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pinheiro-Neto%2C+Carlos+D%2E%22">Pinheiro-Neto, Carlos D.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3921-4658">0000-0003-3921-4658</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Morris%2C+Jonathan+M%2E%22">Morris, Jonathan M.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5035-3910">0000-0001-5035-3910</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Peris-Celda%2C+Maria%22">Peris-Celda, Maria</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9189-303X">0000-0002-9189-303X</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Anatomical+Sciences+Education%22"><i>Anatomical Sciences Education</i></searchLink>. Sep-Oct 2023 16(5):870-883.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 14
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Guidelines%22">Guidelines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Anatomy%22">Anatomy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Simulation%22">Computer Simulation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Models%22">Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Photography%22">Photography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Measurement%22">Measurement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hands+on+Science%22">Hands on Science</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Laboratory+Procedures%22">Laboratory Procedures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Human+Body%22">Human Body</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Brain%22">Brain</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Software%22">Computer Software</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Handheld+Devices%22">Handheld Devices</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computers%22">Computers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology+Uses+in+Education%22">Technology Uses in Education</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/ase.2274
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1935-9772<br />1935-9780
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Hands-on dissections using cadaveric tissues for neuroanatomical education are not easily available in many educational institutions due to financial, safety, and ethical factors. Supplementary pedagogical tools, for instance, 3D models of anatomical specimens acquired with photogrammetry are an efficient alternative to democratize the 3D anatomical data. The aim of this study was to describe a technical guideline for acquiring realistic 3D anatomic models with photogrammetry and to improve the teaching and learning process in neuroanatomy. Seven specimens with different sizes, cadaveric tissues, and textures were used to demonstrate the step-by-step instructions for specimen preparation, photogrammetry setup, post-processing, and display of the 3D model. The photogrammetry scanning consists of three cameras arranged vertically facing the specimen to be scanned. In order to optimize the scanning process and the acquisition of optimal images, high-quality 3D models require complex and challenging adjustments in the positioning of the specimens within the scanner, as well as adjustments of the turntable, custom specimen holders, cameras, lighting, computer hardware, and its software. MeshLab® software was used for editing the 3D model before exporting it to MedReality® (Thyng, Chicago, IL) and SketchFab® (Epic, Cary, NC) platforms. Both allow manipulation of the models using various angles and magnifications and are easily accessed using mobile, immersive, and personal computer devices free of charge for viewers. Photogrammetry scans offer a 360° view of the 3D models ubiquitously accessible on any device independent of operating system and should be considered as a tool to optimize and democratize the teaching of neuroanatomy.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2023
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1391073
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1391073
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/ase.2274
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 14
        StartPage: 870
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Guidelines
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Anatomy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Simulation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Models
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Photography
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Measurement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Hands on Science
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Laboratory Procedures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Human Body
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Brain
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Software
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Handheld Devices
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technology Uses in Education
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Foundations and Guidelines for High-Quality Three-Dimensional Models Using Photogrammetry: A Technical Note on the Future of Neuroanatomy Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Oliveira, André de Sá Braga
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Leonel, Luciano César P. C.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: LaHood, Edward R.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Hallak, Hana
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Link, Michael J.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Maleszewski, Joseph J.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pinheiro-Neto, Carlos D.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Morris, Jonathan M.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Peris-Celda, Maria
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2023
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1935-9772
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1935-9780
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 16
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Anatomical Sciences Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1