Arbrea Labs
iPad-native · LiDAR assisted · face and breast
- Score
- 5.1/ 10
- Est. price
- $240–420per month · our estimate
- Capture
- ~90 svendor-stated
- Hardware purchase
- Nouses a LiDAR iPad
- Visual engine
- 3D / AR renderingsynthetic overlay
The finding
Workflow is the strength. Visual credibility is not.
Arbrea’s clearest advantage is speed: the tablet workflow keeps capture and simulation inside a familiar consultation device.
The live-camera context does not make the altered tissue realistic. In public examples, the inserted surface remains conspicuously smooth and artificial. A prospective breast study supports simulated volume while explicitly not guaranteeing shape, and comparable facial outcome evidence is sparse.
With no current public clinic price or contract scope, the product’s workflow promise cannot support a high value score. It is a fast visual aid, not a photorealistic prediction.
How it scored
5.1 / 10Supports
- Fast documented tablet capture
- On-device consultation workflow
- Independent breast-volume research exists
Detracts
- Inserted AR tissue remains visibly artificial in public samples
- Breast shape accuracy is not guaranteed by volume accuracy
- Independent facial outcome evidence is especially thin
- No current public clinic price or contract scope
Pricing
Estimate · confidence Low–moderateHow we arrived at this. The weakest estimate in this assessment. Anchored to the position a newer entrant has to take against Crisalix, plus a small number of figures reported publicly by European practices. Treat the band as indicative and verify directly.
- Single practice
- estimated, monthly · ~$240/mo
- Two sites
- estimated, annual · ~$420/mo