Show simple item record

Forensic facial identification – reconstruction of facial geometry and shape from dental dimensions

dc.contributor.authorChitara, Nandini
dc.contributor.authorKrishan, Kewal
dc.date.accessioned2024-10-25T06:30:02Z
dc.date.available2024-10-25T06:30:02Z
dc.date.issued2024-09-30
dc.identifier.issn1898-6773
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11089/53518
dc.description.abstractHuman identification has always remained as a main task of forensic anthropology and forensic science for various purposes. The purpose of human identification may vary from legal identity to disaster victim identification, from criminal identity to unidentified deceased identification. The condition, such as putrefaction, charring and mutilation of corpse always become an obstacle during the process of identification. Due to surviving nature of teeth, they may serve as evidence for identification in highly decomposed conditions. Therefore, a cross-sectional study was conducted on 207 participants (93 males and 114 females) in the age range of 21 to 45 years with the aim of two-dimensional facial reconstruction. Dental casts, anthropometric facial measurements and facial photographs were obtained from the participants. Dental measurements were taken on the cast in the laboratory. Statistical analysis revealed a weak but statistically significant correlation between the dental and facial parameters. The geometrical faces and the shapes were reconstructed based on the dental dimensions. The reconstructed facial geometry and shapes were very similar to the true facial geometry and facial shapes of the individual. By improving identification of disaster victims and unidentified deceased, the results of the study can have considerable implications in forensic and medico-legal case-works.en
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherWydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiegopl
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAnthropological Review;3en
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
dc.subjectfacial morphologyen
dc.subjectfacial reconstructionen
dc.subjectfacial dimensionsen
dc.subjectdental dimensionsen
dc.subjectforensic identificationen
dc.subjectdisaster victim identificationen
dc.titleForensic facial identification – reconstruction of facial geometry and shape from dental dimensionsen
dc.typeArticle
dc.page.number47-63
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationChitara, Nandini - Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, Indiaen
dc.contributor.authorAffiliationKrishan, Kewal - Department of Anthropology, Panjab University, Chandigarh, Indiaen
dc.identifier.eissn2083-4594
dc.referencesAlaghbari SS, Mohmmed BS, Alalwani NN, Sobhy MM, Qadi KA, Khawaji SA, Mhbob HO, Alsadi FM, Al Moaleem MM. 2023. Analysis of the facial measurements and dental arch dimensions for the construction of dental prostheses among adult Yemenis. J Contemp Dent Pract 24(8):595–604. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3511en
dc.referencesAlshamri HA, Al-Moaleem MM, Al-Huthaifi BH, Al-Labani MA, Naseeb WR, Daghriri SM, Suhail IM, Hamzi WH, Abu Illah MJ, Thubab AY, Aljabali SA. 2023. Correlation between maxillary anterior teeth and common facial measurements. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 15:289–300. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S438302en
dc.referencesAnu V, Arsheya GS, Anjana V, Annison GK, Aruna ML, Alice AP, Aishwarya, BA. 2018. Dental caries experience, dental anomalies, and morphometric analysis of canine among monozygotic and dizygotic twins. Contemp Clin Dent 9(Suppl 2):S314–S317. https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_345_18en
dc.referencesBajnoczky I, Kiralyfalvi L. 1995. A new approach to computer-aided comparison of skull and photograph. Int J Legal Med 108(3):157–161. doi: 10.1007/BF01844829.en
dc.referencesBanerjee A, Kamath VV, Satelur K, Rajkumar K, Sundaram L. 2016. Sexual dimorphism in tooth morphometrics: An evaluation of the parameters. J Forensic Dent Sci 8(1):22–27. https://doi.org/10.4103/0975-1475.176946en
dc.referencesChitara N, Rani D, Kanchan T, Krishan K. Odontoma and other congenital dental anomalies: Implications for forensic identification. Congenit Anom 63(5):132– 140. https://doi.org/10.1111/cga.12533en
dc.referencesChunhabundit P, Prateepamornkul P, Arayapisit T, Teavirat N, Tanachotevorapong P, Varrathyarom P, Srimaneekarn N. 2023. Two-dimensional facial measurements for anterior tooth selection in complete denture treatment. Heliyon 9(10):e20302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20302en
dc.referencesDamas S, Cordón O, Ibáñez O. 2020. Handbook on craniofacial superimposition: The MEPROCS project. 1st ed. New York: Springer Nature.en
dc.referencesFilipovic G, Kanjevac T, Cetenovic B, Ajdukovic Z, Petrovic N. 2016. Sexual dimorphism in the dimensions of teeth in a Serbian population. Coll Antropol 40(1):23–28. PMID: 27301233.en
dc.referencesGomes VL, Gonçalves LC, Do Prado CJ, Junior IL, De Lima Lucas B. 2006. Correlation between facial measurements and the mesiodistal width of the maxillary anterior teeth. J Esthet Restor Dent 18(4):196–205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2006.00019_1.xen
dc.referencesHall JG, Froster-Iskenius UG, Allanson JE. 1989. Hand Book of normal physical measurements. Oxford: Oxford University Press.en
dc.referencesHinchliffe J. 2011. Forensic odontology, part 1. Dental identification. Br Dent J 210:219–224.en
dc.referencesINTERPOL. 2018. Disaster Victim Identification Guide. [cited 2023 Nov 2023]. Available from https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Forensics/Disaster-Victim-Identification-DVIen
dc.referencesJahanshahi M. 2012. Ethnicity and Facial Anthropometry. In: Handbook of Anthropometry: Physical Measures of Human Form in Health and Disease. New York: Springer Nature.en
dc.referencesJain A, Saxena A, Jain S, Parihar AP, Rawat A. 2021. Prevalence of developmental dental anomalies of number and size in Indian population according to age and gender. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 14(4):531–536. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1980en
dc.referencesJayakrishnan JM, Reddy J, Kumar RV. 2021. Role of forensic odontology and anthropology in the identification of human remains. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol 25(3):543–547. https://doi.org/10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_81_21en
dc.referencesJodalli PS, Panchmal GS, Sonde L, Somaraj V. 2016. Heterogeneous occlusal traits among monozygotic twins from the village of twins–A report of 3 cases. Ann Int Med Dent Res 2(6):DE19–23. https://doi.org/10.21276/aimdr.2016.2.6.DE4en
dc.referencesKini AY, Angadi GS. 2013. Biometric ratio in estimating widths of maxillary anterior teeth derived after correlating anthropometric measurements with dental measurements. Gerodontology 30(2):105–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-2358.2012.00648.xen
dc.referencesKoralakunte PR, Budihal DH. 2012. A clinical study to evaluate the correlation between maxillary central incisor tooth form and face form in an Indian population. J Oral Sci 54(3):273–278. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.54.273en
dc.referencesKrishan K, Kanchan T, Garg AK. Dental evidence in forensic identification–An overview, methodology and present status. Open Dent J 9:250–256. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601509010250en
dc.referencesLu X, Jain AK. 2004. Ethnicity identification from face images. In: Proceedings of SPIE 5404:114–123. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.542847en
dc.referencesMadi HA, Swaid S, Al-Amad S. 2013. Assessment of the uniqueness of human dentition. J Forensic Odontostomatol 31(1):30–39. PMID: 24776439.en
dc.referencesMatis JA, Zwemer TJ. 1971. Odontognathic discrimination of United States Indian and Eskimo groups. J Dent Res 50(5):1245–1248. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345710500052501en
dc.referencesMehndiratta A, Bembalagi M, Patil R. 2019. Evaluating the association of tooth form of maxillary central incisors with face shape using AutoCAD software: A descriptive study. J Prosthodont 28(2):e469–e472. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12707en
dc.referencesMishra MK, Singh RK, Suwal P, Parajuli PK, Shrestha P, Baral D. 2016. A comparative study to find out the relationship between the inner inter-canthal distance, interpupillary distance, inter-commissural width, inter-alar width, and the width of maxillary anterior teeth in Aryans and Mongoloids. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 8:29–34. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S87837en
dc.referencesMohammed F, Fairozekhan AT, Bhat S, Menezes RG. 2019. Forensic Odontology. Treasure Island: StatPearls Publishing.en
dc.referencesMoreno-Gómez F. 2013. Sexual dimorphism in human teeth from dental morphology and dimensions: A dental anthropology viewpoint. In: Sexual Dimorphism. London: InTechen
dc.referencesMoritsugudi DS, Fugiwara FV, Vassallo FN, Mazzilli LE, Beaini TL, Melani RF. 2022. Facial soft tissue thickness in forensic facial reconstruction: Impact of regional differences in Brazil. PLos ONE 17(7):e0270980. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270980en
dc.referencesNeda AK, Garib BT. 2016. Selecting maxillary anterior tooth width by measuring certain facial dimensions in the Kurdish population. J Prosthet Dent 115(3):329–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.08.012en
dc.referencesOmar H, Alhajrasi M, Felemban N, Hassan A. 2018. Dental arch dimensions, form and tooth size ratio among a Saudi sample. Saudi Med J 39(1):86–91. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2018.1.21035en
dc.referencesÖzdemir H, Köseoğlu M. 2019. Relationship between different points on the face and the width of maxillary central teeth in a Turkish population. J Prosthet Dent 122(1):63–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.11.006en
dc.referencesParciak EC, Dahiya AT, AlRumaih HS, Kattadiyil MT, Baba NZ, Goodacre CJ. 2017. Comparison of maxillary anterior tooth width and facial dimensions of 3 ethnicities. J Prosthte Dent 118(4):504–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.035en
dc.referencesSingh IP, Bhasin MK. 1968. Anthropometry. Delhi: Kamla Raj Enterprises.en
dc.referencesTinoco RL, Lima LN, Delwing F, Francesquini JrL, Daruge JrE. 2016. Dental anthropology of a Brazilian sample: Frequency of nonmetric traits. Forensic Sci Int 258:102–e1–e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.10.019en
dc.referencesUbelaker DH, Bubniak E, O’Donnell G. 1992. Computer-assisted photographic superimposition. J Forensic Sci 37:750–762.en
dc.referencesVoegeli R, Schoop R, Prestat-Marquis E, Rawlings AV, Shackelford TK, Fink B. 2021. Cross-cultural perception of female facial appearance: A multi-ethnic and multi-centre study. PLos ONE 16(1):e0245998. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245998en
dc.referencesWolfart S, Menzel H, Kern M. 2004. Inability to relate tooth forms to face shape and gender. Eur J Oral Sci 112(6):471–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2004.00170.xen
dc.referencesZorba E, Moraitis K, Manolis SK. 2011. Sexual dimorphism in permanent teeth of modern Greeks. Forensic Sci Int 210(1– 3):74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2011.02.001en
dc.contributor.authorEmailChitara, Nandini - chitaranandini058@gmail.com
dc.contributor.authorEmailKrishan, Kewal - gargkk@yahoo.com
dc.identifier.doi10.18778/1898-6773.87.3.04
dc.relation.volume87


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
729_04_Chitara__ost.pdf
Size:
1.103Mb
Format:
PDF
View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0