Dharwadkar Pranjal Milind, Waingade Manjushri, Patankar Swapna Amod, Patankar Amod, Godse Adwait Madhav, Nagrale Prajakta
Department of Oral Medicine and Dental Radiology, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology and Oral Microbiology, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University Dental College and Hospital, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2022 Jul-Sep;26(3):340-345. doi: 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_449_21. Epub 2022 Oct 17.
There has been extensive focus on forensic odontology with an increase in the research for age estimation procedures. Teeth are biological markers for human age estimation. In adults, age estimation with a tooth has to be done by the analysis of cementum annulations, root transparency and determination of aspartic acid racemization. Various age estimation methods are known in literature; however, the reliability and relevance of these methods for the Indian population have seldom been studied.
To assess and compare age estimation by Drusini's method and Jeon's method and correlate chronological age and age estimation by both the methods in Indian Adults.
Comparative assessment of Drusini's method and Jeon's method for age estimation within Indian adults.
Two hundred intraoral periapical radiovisuographs of the patients aged 20-69 years with optimum diagnostic quality radiographic images of permanent mandibular first molars were selected from the digital archive of the Department of Oral Medicine Diagnosis and Radiology from the dental college. Measurements were done using Drusini's and Jeon's methods and compared with the chronological age. A < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test, -test.
Mean chronological age, estimated using Jeon's method and estimated by Drusini's method, was 30.77 ± 9.32, 29.790 ± 7.729 and 27.885 ± 8.190, respectively. This difference was statistically highly significant, whereas Jeon's method showed a strong positive correlation between chronological age and age.
The study concludes that Jeon's method is more accurate than Drusini's in the Indian population.
随着年龄估计程序研究的增加，法医牙科学受到了广泛关注。牙齿是人类年龄估计的生物学标记。在成年人中，必须通过分析牙骨质年轮、牙根透明度以及测定天冬氨酸消旋化来进行牙齿年龄估计。文献中已知各种年龄估计方法；然而，这些方法对印度人群的可靠性和相关性很少被研究。
评估和比较德鲁西尼方法和全氏方法对印度成年人的年龄估计，并将实际年龄与两种方法的年龄估计进行关联。
对印度成年人中德鲁西尼方法和全氏方法进行年龄估计的比较评估。
从牙科学院口腔医学诊断与放射学系的数字档案中选取200张年龄在20 - 69岁患者的下颌第一恒磨牙的口腔根尖周放射影像，这些影像具有最佳诊断质量。使用德鲁西尼方法和全氏方法进行测量，并与实际年龄进行比较。P < 0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
方差分析后进行图基检验、t检验。
使用全氏方法估计的平均实际年龄、使用德鲁西尼方法估计的平均实际年龄分别为30.77 ± 9.32、29.790 ± 7.729和27.885 ± 8.190。这种差异在统计学上具有高度显著性，而全氏方法显示实际年龄与估计年龄之间存在强正相关。
该研究得出结论，在印度人群中，全氏方法比德鲁西尼方法更准确。
Zotero 插件