Background

Trans women can be treated with hormone therapy to induce feminization such as more adipose tissue on the hips, softer skin, and breast growth. Feminization, especially in terms of breast growth, is important for trans women. Thus, monitoring breast growth in a reliable, viable, simple and objective way is essential.

Objectives

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether 3D imaging techniques are suitable to monitor breast growth in trans women. The secondary aim of this study was to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of these techniques, taking into account the costs, user-friendliness, patient-friendliness, and editing capabilities for each 3D scanning method we used.

Methods

In this study we compared three different 3D techniques: the Artec Eva scanner, Vectra XT scanner, and the iPhone X using a 3D application called ‘Heges’. We used a dummy with three different prostheses of which we knew the volume and compared the volumes calculated by the different 3D techniques. To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages, the different techniques were ranked first (three points), second (two points), or third (one point).

Results

To date, our preliminary results show that using the results of the Artec Eva scanner as reference, the Vectra XT scanner had a volume difference of maximum 14.52 CC. The iPhone X measurements had a volume difference of maximum 25.71 CC, using the Artec Eva measurements as a reference. The Vectra XT and Artec Eva scanner were ranked higher than the iPhone X in the categories user-friendliness, patient-friendliness, and editing capabilities. The iPhone X was ranked highest in the category costs.

Conclusions

The iPhone X volume measurements seem comparable to the Artec Eva and Vectra XT volume measurements. Furthermore, the iPhone X was the most affordable technique. However, the iPhone X scored considerably lower in all the other categories. Therefore, the Vectra XT and Artec Eva are better scanners to monitor breast growth in trans women.