| Literature DB >> 28611927 |
Emiliya Taneva1, Carla Evans1, Grace Viana1.
Abstract
The study of identical twins can point out potential limitations in biometrics and forensic odontology. This case report presents three-dimensional (3D) palatal rugae analysis in monozygotic twins utilizing digital models obtained directly by scanning the maxillary dental arch with the iTero® intraoral digital scanner. The results show that the rugae patterns contain related but not identical features between the pair of identical twins. Dental study models taken on a regular basis for diagnosis and treatment planning in dentistry include the palatal rugae, which could be valuable to forensics in identical twin identification cases.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28611927 PMCID: PMC5458370 DOI: 10.1155/2017/2648312
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Case Rep Dent
Figure 1Facial and intraoral photographs of the identical twins.
Figure 2Panoramic radiographs of the identical twins.
Figure 3Maxillary occlusal digital models of the identical twins with the selected medial and lateral points of the palatal rugae.
Figure 4Color-coded map generated following 3D Compare analysis.
Figure 5Annotation view with selected medial and lateral points of the palatal rugae.
Rugae size and shape of the identical twins pair.
| Palatal landmarks | Twin 1 | Twin 2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size | Shape | Size | Shape | |
| R1R | 10.9 mm | Straight | Missing | Missing |
| R2R | 12.6 mm | Circle | 13.2 mm | Circle |
| R3R | 13.1 mm | Sinuous | 11.0 mm | Sinuous |
| R1L | Missing | Missing | Missing | Missing |
| R2L | 10.6 mm | Sinuous | 12.2 mm | Straight |
| R3L | 13.5 mm | Circle | 13.2 mm | Circle |
One-sample t-test results from the deviation magnitude comparison of identical twins and same individual values.
| 3D measurements |
| Mean | (±) SD |
| df | Sig. | 95% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||||||
| R1MR | 24 | .035 | .338 | −2.324 | 23 | .029 | −.303 | −.018 |
| R2MR | 24 | −.059 | .240 | −1.876 | 23 | .073 | −.193 | .009 |
| R3MR | 24 | −.067 | .249 | 4.113 | 23 | .000 | .104 | .314 |
| R2ML | 24 | .050 | .265 | 2.891 | 23 | .008 | .045 | .268 |
| R3ML | 24 | −.009 | .375 | 6.429 | 23 | .000 | .334 | .650 |
| R1LR | 24 | −.058 | .419 | −.363 | 23 | .720 | −.208 | .146 |
| R2LR | 24 | −.097 | .484 | −1.427 | 23 | .167 | −.345 | .063 |
| R3LR | 24 | .005 | .358 | −6.535 | 23 | .000 | −.628 | −.326 |
| R1LL | 24 | −.023 | .343 | 6.649 | 23 | .000 | .321 | .610 |
| R2LL | 24 | .032 | .437 | −9.740 | 23 | .000 | −1.054 | −.684 |
| R3LL | 24 | −.028 | .458 | −6.798 | 23 | .000 | −.830 | −.442 |
Statistically significant differences at p ≤ 0.05.
One-sample t-test results from the deviation magnitude comparison of identical twins and different individual values.
| 3D measurements |
| Mean | (±) SD |
| df | Sig. | 95% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||||||
| R1MR | 28 | .151 | .566 | −.417 | 27 | .680 | −.264 | .175 |
| R2MR | 28 | −.095 | .762 | −.888 | 27 | .382 | −.424 | .168 |
| R3MR | 28 | −.248 | .918 | .162 | 27 | .872 | −.328 | .384 |
| R2ML | 28 | −.108 | 1.037 | −.012 | 27 | .991 | −.404 | .400 |
| R3ML | 28 | −.211 | 1.172 | 1.308 | 27 | .202 | −.165 | .744 |
| R1LR | 28 | −.047 | 1.057 | −.102 | 27 | .920 | −.430 | .390 |
| R2LR | 28 | .140 | 1.318 | .385 | 27 | .703 | −.415 | .607 |
| R3LR | 28 | .163 | 1.540 | −1.099 | 27 | .282 | −.917 | .277 |
| R1LL | 28 | −.069 | 1.006 | 2.202 | 27 | .036 | .028 | .809 |
| R2LL | 28 | −.015 | 1.325 | −3.657 | 27 | .001 | −1.430 | −.402 |
| R3LL | 28 | −.195 | 1.534 | −2.772 | 27 | .010 | −1.398 | −.209 |
Statistically significant differences at p ≤ 0.05.