Literature DB >> 19239578

Towards quantifying the aesthetic outcomes of breast cancer treatment: comparison of clinical photography and colorimetry.

Min Soon Kim1, William N Rodney, Tara Cooper, Chris Kite, Gregory P Reece, Mia K Markey.   

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: Scarring is a significant cause of dissatisfaction for women who undergo breast surgery. Scar tissue may be clinically distinguished from normal skin by aberrant colour, rough surface texture, increased thickness (hypertrophy) and firmness. Colorimeters or spectrophotometers can be used to quantitatively assess scar colour, but they require direct patient interaction and can cost thousands of dollars. By comparison, digital photography is already in widespread use to document clinical outcomes and requires less patient interaction. Thus, assessment of scar coloration by digital photography is an attractive alternative. The goal of this study was to compare colour measurements obtained by digital photography and colorimetry.
METHODS: Agreements between photographic and colorimetric measurements of colour were evaluated. Experimental conditions were controlled by performing measurements on artificial scars created by a make-up artist. The colorimetric measurements of the artificial scars were compared with those reported in the literature for real scars in order to confirm the validity of this approach. We assessed the agreement between the colorimetric and photographic measurements of colour using a hypothesis test for equivalence, the intraclass correlation coefficient and the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: Overall, good agreement was obtained for three parameters (L*a*b*) measured by colorimetry and photography from the results of three statistical analyses.
CONCLUSION: Colour measurements obtained by digital photography were equivalent to those obtained using colorimetry. Thus, digital photography is a reliable, cost-effective measurement method of skin colour and should be further investigated for quantitative analysis of surgical outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19239578      PMCID: PMC3072466          DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.00945.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  31 in total

1.  Reproducibility of repeated measurements on healthy skin with Minolta Chromameter CR-300.

Authors:  E Van den Kerckhove; F Staes; M Flour; K Stappaerts; W Boeckx
Journal:  Skin Res Technol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 2.365

2.  Improving scar quality: a prospective clinical study.

Authors:  Bishara S Atiyeh; John Ioannovich; Christian A Al-Amm; Kusai A El-Musa; Ruwayda Dham
Journal:  Aesthetic Plast Surg       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.326

Review 3.  Applying the right statistics: analyses of measurement studies.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 7.299

4.  Pedicled TRAM breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Klaus J Walgenbach; Kenneth C Shestak
Journal:  Breast Dis       Date:  2002

5.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Standardized assessment of breast cancer surgical scars integrating the Vancouver Scar Scale, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and patients' perspectives.

Authors:  Pauline T Truong; Freddy Abnousi; Celina M Yong; Allen Hayashi; James A Runkel; Theressa Phillips; Ivo A Olivotto
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Outcome comparison between free and pedicled TRAM flap breast reconstruction in the obese patient.

Authors:  S L Moran; J M Serletti
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.730

8.  Comparison of narrow-band reflectance spectrophotometric and tristimulus colorimetric measurements of skin color. Twenty-three anatomical sites evaluated by the Dermaspectrometer and the Chroma Meter CR-200.

Authors:  H Takiwaki; L Overgaard; J Serup
Journal:  Skin Pharmacol       Date:  1994

9.  Breast ptosis. Definition and treatment.

Authors:  P Regnault
Journal:  Clin Plast Surg       Date:  1976-04       Impact factor: 2.017

10.  The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation.

Authors:  Lieneke J Draaijers; Fenike R H Tempelman; Yvonne A M Botman; Wim E Tuinebreijer; Esther Middelkoop; Robert W Kreis; Paul P M van Zuijlen
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.730

View more
  5 in total

1.  A pilot study on using eye tracking to understand assessment of surgical outcomes from clinical photography.

Authors:  Min Soon Kim; Angela Burgess; Andrew J Waters; Gregory P Reece; Elisabeth K Beahm; Melissa A Crosby; Karen M Basen-Engquist; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Automated calculation of symmetry measure on clinical photographs.

Authors:  Mugdha Dabeer; Edward Kim; Gregory P Reece; Fatima Merchant; Melissa A Crosby; Elisabeth K Beahm; Mia K Markey
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2010-07-13       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  A research agenda for appearance changes due to breast cancer treatment.

Authors:  Mugdha Dabeer; Michelle Cororve Fingeret; Fatima Merchant; Gregory P Reece; Elisabeth K Beahm; Mia K Markey
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Auckl)       Date:  2008-06-16

4.  Validation of stereophotogrammetry of the human torso.

Authors:  Juhun Lee; Manas Kawale; Fatima A Merchant; June Weston; Michelle C Fingeret; Dianne Ladewig; Gregory P Reece; Melissa A Crosby; Elisabeth K Beahm; Mia K Markey
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Auckl)       Date:  2011-02-15

Review 5.  A systematic review of objective burn scar measurements.

Authors:  Kwang Chear Lee; Janine Dretzke; Liam Grover; Ann Logan; Naiem Moiemen
Journal:  Burns Trauma       Date:  2016-04-27
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.