| Literature DB >> 29260392 |
Erli Sarilita1,2,3, Christopher Rynn4, Peter A Mossey5, Sue Black4, Fahmi Oscandar6.
Abstract
This study investigated nose profile morphology and its relationship to the skull in Scottish subadult and Indonesian adult populations, with the aim of improving the accuracy of forensic craniofacial reconstruction. Samples of 86 lateral head cephalograms from Dundee Dental School (mean age, 11.8 years) and 335 lateral head cephalograms from the Universitas Padjadjaran Dental Hospital, Bandung, Indonesia (mean age 24.2 years), were measured. The method of nose profile estimation based on skull morphology previously proposed by Rynn and colleagues in 2010 (FSMP 6:20-34) was tested in this study. Following this method, three nasal aperture-related craniometrics and six nose profile dimensions were measured from the cephalograms. To assess the accuracy of the method, six nose profile dimensions were estimated from the three craniometric parameters using the published method and then compared to the actual nose profile dimensions.In the Scottish subadult population, no sexual dimorphism was evident in the measured dimensions. In contrast, sexual dimorphism of the Indonesian adult population was evident in all craniometric and nose profile dimensions; notably, males exhibited statistically significant larger values than females. The published method by Rynn and colleagues (FSMP 6:20-34, 2010) performed better in the Scottish subadult population (mean difference of maximum, 2.35 mm) compared to the Indonesian adult population (mean difference of maximum, 5.42 mm in males and 4.89 mm in females).In addition, regression formulae were derived to estimate nose profile dimensions based on the craniometric measurements for the Indonesian adult population. The published method is not sufficiently accurate for use on the Indonesian population, so the derived method should be used. The accuracy of the published method by Rynn and colleagues (FSMP 6:20-34, 2010) was sufficiently reliable to be applied in Scottish subadult population.Entities:
Keywords: Craniofacial reconstruction; Forensic anthropology; Nose morphology; Nose profile estimation
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29260392 PMCID: PMC5919985 DOI: 10.1007/s00414-017-1758-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Legal Med ISSN: 0937-9827 Impact factor: 2.686
Fig. 1Craniometric measurements (X, Y, Z) and nose profile dimension (1 = PA; 2 = PV; 3 = PFHP, 4 = NL; 5 = NH; 6 = ND; FHP = Frankfurt horizontal plane; NPP = nasion-prosthion plane)
Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values for each measurement
| Intra-observer | Inter-observer | |
|---|---|---|
| 0.988 | 0.990 | |
| 0.928 | 0.890 | |
| 0.940 | 0.931 | |
| PA | 0.989 | 0.988 |
| PV | 0.985 | 0.981 |
| PFHP | 0.966 | 0.990 |
| NL | 0.942 | 0.871 |
| NH | 0.940 | 0.879 |
| ND | 0.954 | 0.964 |
Comparison of the actual and estimated nose profile dimension using the published method in the Scottish subadult population
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual mean (mm) | 25.96 | 39.86 | 27.16 | 42.38 | 49.00 | 16.74 |
| Standard deviation | 2.80 | 3.34 | 3.42 | 4.25 | 4.05 | 1.84 |
| Estimated mean (mm) | 25.75 | 40.45 | 26.77 | 41.74 | 49.72 | 19.10 |
| Standard deviation | 2.77 | 2.71 | 3.10 | 2.49 | 2.36 | 1.46 |
| Mean difference (mm) | 0.21 | − 0.59* | 0.39 | 0.63 | − 0.72* | − 2.35* |
| SD difference (mm) | 2.82 | 2.14 | 3.26 | 3.18 | 2.86 | 1.84 |
| Paired | 0.48 | 0.01 | 0.27 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.00 |
| Correlation | 0.49* | 0.77* | 0.50* | 0.67* | 0.72* | 0.40* |
| Correlation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| (Mean difference / actual value) × 100 | 0.83 | 1.48 | 1.44 | 1.49 | 1.48 | 14.05 |
*p < .05
Comparison of the actual and estimated nose profile dimension using the published method in Indonesian males (*p < .05)
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual mean (mm) | 24.11 | 46.91 | 27.31 | 44.01 | 49.49 | 16.96 |
| Standard deviation | 3.21 | 4.15 | 2.79 | 3.50 | 5.08 | 1.92 |
| Estimated mean (mm) | 27.11 | 45.57 | 28.30 | 46.60 | 54.91 | 19.79 |
| Standard deviation | 3.16 | 3.12 | 3.55 | 4.06 | 4.25 | 1.53 |
| Mean difference (mm) | 3.01* | − 1.34* | 0.99* | 2.59* | 5.42* | 2.83* |
| SD difference (mm) | 3.05 | 2.46 | 2.99 | 4.43 | 2.73 | 2.30 |
| Paired | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Correlation | 0.54* | 0.81* | 0.58* | 0.32* | 0.84* | 0.13* |
| Correlation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.25 |
| (Mean difference / actual value) × 100 | 12.48 | 2.86 | 3.61 | 5.89 | 10.95 | 16.66 |
*significant difference at the 0.05 level
Comparison of the actual and estimated nose profile dimension using the published method in Indonesian females (*p < .05)
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual mean (mm) | 20.89 | 44.19 | 23.54 | 40.35 | 46.59 | 15.92 |
| Standard deviation | 2.18 | 2.73 | 2.23 | 3.13 | 3.25 | 1.47 |
| Estimated mean (mm) | 24.13 | 42.57 | 24.95 | 44.00 | 51.48 | 18.14 |
| Standard deviation | 1.89 | 2.40 | 2.11 | 2.17 | 1.85 | 1.14 |
| Mean difference (mm) | 3.23* | − 1.62* | 1.41* | 3.66* | 4.89* | 2.22* |
| SD difference (mm) | 2.09 | 1.63 | 2.32 | 2.90 | 2.77 | 1.39 |
| Paired | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Correlation | 0.48* | 0.81* | 0.43* | 0.45* | 0.53* | 0.45* |
| Correlation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| (Mean difference / actual value) × 100 | 15.47 | 3.66 | 6.00 | 9.06 | 10.49 | 13.97 |
*Significant difference at the 0.05 level
The percentage of individuals whose percentage of nose profile dimension were reconstructed using the published method within a 2-mm error and within a 5% error from the actual dimension
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scottish subadults | Total sample ( | ||||||
| % of cases within a 2-mm error | 52 | 62 | 50 | 43 | 57 | 35 | |
| % of cases within a 5% error | 41 | 62 | 35 | 45 | 69 | 16 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.3 | ± 2.0 | ± 1.4 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.4 | ± 0.8 | |
| Males ( | |||||||
| % of cases within a 2-mm error | 46 | 63 | 46 | 49 | 59 | 29 | |
| % of cases within a 5% error | 39 | 63 | 27 | 51 | 68 | 10 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.3 | ± 2.0 | ± 1.3 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.5 | ± 0.8 | |
| Females ( | |||||||
| % of cases within a 2-mm error | 58 | 60 | 53 | 38 | 56 | 40 | |
| % of cases within a 5% error | 42 | 60 | 44 | 40 | 69 | 22 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.3 | ± 2.0 | ± 1.4 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.4 | ± 0.8 | |
| Indonesian adults | Total sample ( | ||||||
| % of cases within a 2-mm error | 29 | 58 | 55 | 28 | 13 | 41 | |
| % of cases within a 5% error | 15 | 64 | 34 | 28 | 16 | 13 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.1 | ± 2.2 | ± 1.2 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.4 | ± 0.8 | |
| Males ( | |||||||
| % of cases within a 2-mm error | 36 | 64 | 55 | 34 | 10 | 41 | |
| % of cases within a 5% error | 20 | 67 | 45 | 39 | 11 | 8 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.2 | ± 2.2 | ± 1.5 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.5 | ± 0.9 | |
| Females ( | |||||||
| % of cases within a 2 mm error | 27 | 56 | 55 | 26 | 13 | 41 | |
| % of cases within 5% error | 13 | 61 | 32 | 28 | 18 | 14 | |
| 5% error (mm) | ± 1.0 | ± 2.1 | ± 1.1 | ± 2.1 | ± 2.4 | ± 0.8 |
List of the highest correlation between each nose profile parameters to the craniometrics variable
| Nose profile parameters | Male | Female | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independent variable | Pearson correlation | Independent variable | Pearson correlation | |
| PA | 0.550* | 0.476* | ||
| PV | 0.844* | 0.806* | ||
| PFHP | 0.597* | 0.432* | ||
| NL | 0.456* | 0.513* | ||
| NH | 0.845* | 0.566* | ||
| ND | 0.632* | 0.451* | ||
*p < .001
Nose profile estimation formulae generated by Indonesia adult population and the published method
| Nose profile dimension | Published method | ICC of actual vs published method | Derived method | ICC of actual vs derived method | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Male | Female | |||
| PA | 0.83 × | 0.541* | 0.57 × | 0.725* | ||
| PV | 0.90 × | 0.846* | 0.88 × | 0.906* | ||
| PFHP | 0.93 × | 0.727* | 0.58 × | 0.730* | ||
| NL | 0.74 × | 0.477* | 0.66 × | 0.685* | ||
| NH | 0.78 × | 0.79 × | 0.515* | 0.79 × | 0.69 × | 0.830* |
| ND | 0.40 × | 0.23 × | 0.317* | 0.22 × | 0.29 × | 0.655* |
*p < .001
Comparison of the actual and estimated nose profile dimension using the derived method in Indonesian males (*p < .05)
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual mean (mm) | 24.11 | 46.91 | 27.31 | 44.01 | 49.49 | 16.96 |
| Standard deviation | 3.21 | 4.15 | 2.79 | 3.50 | 5.08 | 1.92 |
| Estimated mean (mm) | 23.38 | 47.29 | 25.97 | 42.72 | 49.78 | 16.84 |
| Standard deviation | 2.16 | 3.01 | 2.20 | 2.25 | 4.32 | 1.20 |
| Mean difference (mm) | − 0.72* | 0.38 | − 1.34* | − 1.28* | 0.29 | − 0.12 |
| SD difference (mm) | 2.71 | 2.28 | 2.30 | 3.18 | 2.72 | 1.49 |
| Paired t test | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.33 | 0.46 |
| Correlation | 0.55* | 0.84* | 0.60* | 0.46* | 0.84* | 0.63* |
| Correlation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| (Mean difference / actual value) × 100 | 3.01 | 0.81 | 4.92 | 2.91 | 0.59 | 0.72 |
*Significant difference at the 0.05 level
Comparison of the actual and estimated nose profile dimension using the derived method in Indonesian females (*p < .05)
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actual mean (mm) | 20.89 | 44.19 | 23.54 | 40.35 | 46.59 | 15.92 |
| Standard deviation | 2.18 | 2.73 | 2.23 | 3.13 | 3.25 | 1.47 |
| Estimated mean (mm) | 21.30 | 44.31 | 23.85 | 40.49 | 46.57 | 15.89 |
| Standard deviation | 1.30 | 2.35 | 1.32 | 1.76 | 1.84 | 0.66 |
| Mean difference (mm) | 0.41* | 0.12 | 0.31* | 0.14 | − 0.03 | − 0.03 |
| SD difference (mm) | 1.93 | 1.63 | 2.05 | 2.69 | 2.68 | 1.31 |
| Paired | 0.00 | 0.25 | 0.02 | 0.40 | 0.88 | 0.75 |
| Correlation | 0.48* | 0.81* | 0.43* | 0.51* | 0.57* | 0.45* |
| Correlation | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| (Mean difference / actual value) × 100 | 1.96 | 0.27 | 1.33 | 0.36 | 0.05 | 0.17 |
*Significant difference at the 0.05 level
Fig. 2Bar chart of mean differences between two methods in absolute values
Average values of nose morphology between two populations (mm)
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scottish subadult | 47.20 | 35.24 | 51.70 | 25.96 | 39.86 | 27.16 | 42.38 | 49.00 | 16.74 |
| Indonesian adult (m) | 52.96 | 36.93 | 58.27 | 24.11 | 46.91 | 27.31 | 44.01 | 49.49 | 16.96 |
| Indonesian adult (f) | 49.57 | 33.28 | 54.73 | 20.89 | 44.19 | 23.54 | 40.35 | 46.59 | 15.92 |
Sample characteristics of nose profile studies
| Author | Ancestry | Sample maturity | Sample size |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ferrario et al. [ | North Italian | Children | 956 (446 males and 510 females) |
| Halazonetis [ | Greek | Children | 170 (82 males and 88 females) |
| Present study | Scottish | Children | 86 (41 males and 45 females) |
| Ferrario et al. [ | North Italian | Adult | 101 (57 males and 44 females) |
| Mala [ | Central European | Adult | 86 (52 males and 34 females) |
| Present study | Indonesian | Adult | 335 (83 males and 252 females) |
Average values comparison of nose profile dimensions between studies
| PA | PV | PFHP | NL | NH | ND | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ferrario et al. [ | Male | 36.19–43.04 | 45.86–53.54 | ||||
| Female | 35.41–42.79 | 44.05–53.73 | |||||
| Halazonetis [ | Male | 42.8 | 49.4 | ||||
| Female | 44.2 | 50.6 | |||||
| Present Study* | Male | 25.68 | 39.85 | 27.00 | 42.12 | 49.10 | 16.71 |
| Female | 26.22 | 39.86 | 27.31 | 42.61 | 48.90 | 16.77 | |
| Ferrario et al. [ | Male | 49.29 | 57.59 | ||||
| Female | 46.37 | 54.33 | |||||
| Mala [ | Male | 32.12 | 44.92 | 34.45 | 48.19 | 53.81 | 20.08 |
| Female | 29.20 | 43.23 | 31.80 | 45.89 | 51.75 | 19.33 | |
| Present Study** | Male | 24.11 | 46.91 | 27.31 | 44.01 | 49.49 | 16.96 |
| Female | 20.89 | 44.19 | 23.54 | 40.35 | 46.59 | 15.92 | |
*Children
**Adults