ArticleEuropean burn journal2026
Three-Dimensional Visualisation of Burn Wounds: Concordance of Artec Eva and Revopoint Miraco with Clinical Photography-A Case Series.
Article in European burn journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of Consumer-Grade 3D Scanners for Clinical Facial Reconstruction: Comparison with a Professional Structured-Light Reference System.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Personalized Clinical Workflow for Compression Therapy in Post-Burn Hypertrophic Scars Using 3D Imaging and Computational Modeling: A Feasibility Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate documentation of burn wounds is essential for evaluating treatment outcomes and monitoring healing progression. Traditional two-dimensional (2D) photography remains the clinical standard but lacks depth and volumetric accuracy. Three-dimensional (3D) scanning offers enhanced visualization of wound morphology and tissue vitality, potentially improving objectivity in burn assessment. This study compares two handheld 3D scanning systems-Artec Eva and Revopoint Miraco-in documenting acute and healing burn wounds, using standard clinical photography as the reference. Fifteen patients with second-degree and third-degree burns were prospectively examined at the Burn Unit of AGEL Hospital Košice-Šaca, with five representative cases selected for detailed analysis. For each patient, clinical photographs and paired 3D scans were obtained under standardized conditions and evaluated for color fidelity, wound margin clarity, representation of epithelialisation islands, necrotic tissue, and correlation with clinical findings. Across all cases, Artec Eva demonstrated superior color accuracy, clearer wound delineation, and more realistic visualization of tissue vitality and re-epithelialisation. Revopoint Miraco reliably captured wound shape but produced darker tones and exaggerated surface relief, occasionally distorting depth perception. Overall, both systems successfully identified key healing features; however, Artec Eva provided more clinically accurate and visually consistent results. Three-dimensional scanning represents a valuable adjunct to conventional burn documentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.