Global illumination rendering versus volume rendering for the forensic evaluation of stab wounds using computed tomography.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 02 2022
14 02 2022
Historique:
received:
12
11
2021
accepted:
01
02
2022
entrez:
15
2
2022
pubmed:
16
2
2022
medline:
12
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We compared three-dimensional (3D) CT images of stabbing victims subjected to volume-rendering (VR) or global illumination-rendering (GIR), a new technique now available for the reconstruction of 3D CT images. It simulates the complete interactions of photons with the scanned object, thereby providing photorealistic images. The diagnostic value of the images was also compared with that of macroscopic photographs. We used postmortem 3D CT images of 14 stabbing victims who had undergone autopsy and CT studies. The 3D CT images were subjected to GIR or VR and the 3D effect and the smoothness of the skin surface were graded on a 5-point scale. We also compared the 3D CT images of 37 stab wounds with macroscopic photographs. The maximum diameter of the wounds was measured on VR and GIR images and compared with the diameter recorded at autopsy. The overall image-quality scores and the ability to assess the stab wounds were significantly better on GIR than VR images (median scores: VR = 3 vs GIR = 4, p < 0.01). The mean difference between the wound diameter measured on VR and GIR images and at autopsy were both 0.2 cm, respectively. For the assessment of stab wounds, 3D CT images subjected to GIR were superior to VR images. The diagnostic value of 3D CT GIR image was comparable to that of macroscopic photographs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35165357
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-06541-9
pii: 10.1038/s41598-022-06541-9
pmc: PMC8844357
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2452Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Eur Radiol. 2019 Nov;29(11):6163-6171
pubmed: 30976831
Eur Radiol. 2021 Jul;31(7):4700-4709
pubmed: 33389036
J Forensic Sci. 2021 May;66(3):1148-1153
pubmed: 33320985
APMIS. 2012 Apr;120(4):316-26
pubmed: 22429214
Forensic Sci Int. 2018 Feb;283:156-172
pubmed: 29304390
J Vis Commun Med. 2020 Jan;43(1):27-34
pubmed: 31815567
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Aug;209(2):370-379
pubmed: 28504564
Eur J Radiol Open. 2020 Sep 08;7:100253
pubmed: 32964073
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e38586
pubmed: 22768292
Leg Med (Tokyo). 2012 May;14(3):116-20
pubmed: 22342377
Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2017 Mar;13(1):34-43
pubmed: 28144846
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2012 Dec;18(12):2364-71
pubmed: 26357144
Leg Med (Tokyo). 2011 Mar;13(2):91-4
pubmed: 21185765
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2020 Sep;45(9):2698-2704
pubmed: 32248261
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2006 Sep-Oct;12(5):869-76
pubmed: 17080811
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Feb;208(2):233-240
pubmed: 27824494
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Jan;204(1):8-14
pubmed: 25539230
Int J Legal Med. 2021 Sep;135(5):1923-1934
pubmed: 33713164
J Forensic Sci. 2003 Mar;48(2):386-403
pubmed: 12665000
Eur Radiol. 2008 Feb;18(2):273-82
pubmed: 17705044
J Vis Commun Med. 2020 Apr;43(2):67-75
pubmed: 31933401
Insights Imaging. 2016 Dec;7(6):849-856
pubmed: 27628743
Emerg Radiol. 2019 Oct;26(5):573-580
pubmed: 31129738
Emerg Radiol. 2021 Feb;28(1):193-199
pubmed: 32617731