Ramus Flexure In Identification Of Sex Of An Induvidual Using Orthopantomogram In South Indian Population - A Reterospective Study

Ashwin krishna B; Abirami Arthanari

doi:10.47750/jptcp.2023.30.06.025

Ashwin krishna B

Undergraduate, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University Chennai-600077

Abirami Arthanari

Senior lecturer, Department of Forensic Odontology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences,Saveetha University, Chennai-600077

Keywords

Mandibular Ramus Flexure, Sex Determination, Radiographs

Abstract

Introduction: Sex of an individual can be identified by bones eg with all the bones we can identify the sex by 100%. Mandible is considered as one of the stronger bones of the skull available for gender identification. Mandibular measurements can be used for the identification of gender either on dry mandible or through panoramic radiography or cone-beam computed tomography
Aim: The purpose of our study is to assess the usefulness of mandibular ramus flexure (left) in gender determination.
Materials and methods: An orthopantomograph was used in a retrospective study of 60 subjects (30 males and 30 females). They ranged in age from 20 to 40 years. For the study, ideal orthopantomography was chosen. These samples were separated based on their birth date and the date of the radiograph.
Results: The ramus flexure of males were 2.93 and the ramus flexure of females were 2.67. The standard deviation of males was 0.73968 and females were 0.66089. The difference between males and females was 0.07879. The standard mean error of males was 0.13505 and females was 0.12066. The difference in standard mean error was 0.01439.
Conclusion: We discovered that orthopantomograph measurements of the mandibular ramus flexure (left side) were reliable for determining sex. As a result, we strongly advise using mandibular ramus flexure (left side) as a forensic aid for gender determination.

Abstract 1764 | PDF Downloads 105

References

1. Indira AP, Markande A, David MP. Mandibular ramus: An indicator for sex determination - A digital radiographic study. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2012 Jul;4(2):58–62.
2. Saunders SR, Herring A. Grave Reflections: Portraying the Past Through Cemetery Studies. Canadian Scholars Press; 1995. 281 p.
3. Schmitt A. Forensic Anthropology and Medicine: Complementary Sciences From Recovery to Cause of Death. Springer Science & Business Media; 2007. 480 p.
4. Biswas G. Recent Advances in Forensic Medicine and Toxicology - 2: Good Practice Guidelines and Current Medicolegal Issues. JP Medical Ltd; 2018. 692 p.
5. Mann RW, Lozanoff S. Photographic Regional Atlas of Non-Metric Traits and Anatomical Variants in the Human Skeleton. Charles C Thomas Publisher; 2016. 744 p.
6. Dolinak D, Matshes E, Lew EO. Forensic Pathology: Principles and Practice. Elsevier; 2005. 616 p.
7. Iscan MY, Steyn M. THE HUMAN SKELETON IN FORENSIC MEDICINE: (3rd Ed.). Charles C Thomas Publisher; 2013. 516 p.
8. Society of the Sons of the Revolution in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Register of Members of the Society of Sons of the Revolution in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 1895. 170 p.
9. Franklin D, O’Higgins P, Oxnard CE, Dadour I. Discriminant function sexing of the mandible of Indigenous South Africans [Internet]. Vol. 179, Forensic Science International. 2008. p. 84.e1–84.e5. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.03.014
10. Franklin D, O’Higgins P, Oxnard CE, Dadour I. Determination of Sex in South African Blacks by Discriminant Function Analysis of Mandibular Linear Dimensions: A Preliminary Investigation Using the Zulu Local Population [Internet]. Vol. 2, Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology. 2006. p. 263–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1385/fsmp:2:4:263
11. Franklin D, Oxnard CE, O’Higgins P, Dadour I. Sexual Dimorphism in the Subadult Mandible: Quantification Using Geometric Morphometrics [Internet]. Vol. 52, Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2007. p. 6–10. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00311.x
12. Dorion RBJ. Bitemark Evidence: A Color Atlas and Text, 2nd Edition. CRC Press; 2011. 680 p.
13. Reddy S, Tavares AI. Evaluation of Health Services. BoD – Books on Demand; 2020. 130 p.
14. Senn DR, Weems RA. Manual of Forensic Odontology, Fifth Edition. CRC Press; 2013. 461 p.
15. Neugebauer EAM, Sauerland S, Fingerhut A, Millat B, Buess GF. EAES Guidelines for Endoscopic Surgery: Twelve Years Evidence-Based Surgery in Europe. Springer Science & Business Media; 2007. 414 p.
16. Plemons E. The Look of a Woman: Facial Feminization Surgery and the Aims of Trans- Medicine. Duke University Press; 2017. 208 p.
17. Latham KE, Bartelink EJ, Finnegan M. New Perspectives in Forensic Human Skeletal Identification. Academic Press; 2017. 374 p.
18. Silver WE, Souviron RR. Dental Autopsy. CRC Press; 2009. 276 p.
19. Leiva V. The Birnbaum-Saunders Distribution. Academic Press; 2015. 154 p.
20. Hill CA. Technical note: evaluating mandibular ramus flexure as a morphological indicator of sex. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2000 Apr;111(4):573–7.

PDF

Published

Apr 11, 2023

DOI https://doi.org/10.47750/jptcp.2023.30.06.025

How to Cite

Ashwin krishna B, & Abirami Arthanari. (2023). Ramus Flexure In Identification Of Sex Of An Induvidual Using Orthopantomogram In South Indian Population - A Reterospective Study. Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology, 30(6), 189–194. https://doi.org/10.47750/jptcp.2023.30.06.025