ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2019 | Volume
: 4
| Issue : 2 | Page : 82-86 |
|
Determination of chronologic age by cone-beam computed tomography analysis of the mental foramen in the south indian population
TS Subhash1, Sowmya Halasbalu Kallgari2, HM Hema3, Y Manohara A Bhat1
1 Department of Dentistry, Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, Mysore, Karnataka, India 2 Department of Conservative and Endodontic, JSS Dental College and Hospital, Mysore, Karnataka, India 3 Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Dentascan CBCT Centre, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Y Manohara A Bhat Department of Dentistry, Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, Mysore, Karnataka India
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/ijfo.ijfo_15_19
|
|
Background: Chronological age determination is one of the most challenging tasks for forensic experts and anthropologists using living humans or skeletal remaining.
Aim: The aim of this study is to determine the chronological age by cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) (three-dimensional) analysis of the mental foramen among the South Indian population.
Methodology: A total of 115 individuals' CBCT images were used for analysis. Space from the superior border of the mental foramen to the lower border of the mandible (SLM) and the inferior border of the mental foramen to the lower border of the mandible (ILM) was analyzed by three examiners and recorded.
Statistical Analysis: Descriptive statistics, ANOVA test, and Tukey's post hoc analysis were utilized for statistical comparisons.
Results: The mean age of included 115 (male: 66 and female: 49) participants was 40.96 ± 0.5. The mean distance of SLM and ILM among 18–20, 21–30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60, and 61–70 years' age group participants exhibited statistically significance in the right (P = 0.01 and 0.016) and left (P = 0.001 and 0.001) sides, respectively.
Conclusion: Distance from the mental foramen to the lower border of the mandible remains constant throughout the lifetime, and the measurement is not significant clinically even though it displays statistical significance.
|
|
|
|
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
|
|