Assessment of sexual dimorphism in Maharashtrian young adults using maxillary intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths: A morphometric study

Abstract

Introduction: Sexual dimorphism practically involves differences in size and appearance of the same species which does not involve the difference in sexual organs. A significant variation also occurs with the tooth size, shape, etc., which plays a critical role in sex determination. Forensic investigations are used in defining the number of missing people whose skeletal remains are unknown. Depending on the available bones and their state, a variety of methods with varying degrees of reliability are available for identifying unknown remains.

Materials and methods: Fifty male and 50 female patients in the age group 20-30 years were randomly selected after taking a detailed history. All maxillary impressions were made with alginate and poured into a dental stone. These casts were measured for intercanine width, interpremolar width, and intermolar width using a digital vernier caliper, and findings were correlated with sexual dimorphism.

Results: Intercanine width between the tips of right and left maxillary canine was measured in males and females at 36.08 ± 2.04 mm (Range: 30.05-41.64 mm) and in females, the mean intercanine width was 34.31 ± 1.75 mm (Range: 28.35-39.01 mm), respectively. Interpremolar width between the distal pits of right and left first premolars was measured in males and females at 38.97 ± 2.10 mm (Range: 33.94-45.21 mm) and in females, the mean interpremolar width was 36.92 ± 1.87 mm (Range: 31.34 mm), respectively. Intermolar width between the central fossae of right and left first molars was measured in males and females at 50.43 ± 2.25 mm (Range: 44.16-56.84 mm) and in females, the mean intermolar width was 47.90 ± 2.06 mm (Range: 42.66-54.63 mm), respectively.

Conclusion: In males, the mean value of the combination of intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths was 125.47 ± 5.61 mm (Range: 108.15-141.86 mm) and in females, it was 119.12 ± 5.05 mm (Range: 103.25-134.36 mm). Mean values of all combinations were larger in males than in females. Thereby, maxillary arch widths contribute to accuracy in determining the gender of the individual.

Keywords: Arch width; intercanine width; intermolar width; interpremolar width; sexual dimorphism.

Figure 1

Shows the armamentarium (alginate, spatula, mixing bowls, metal trays, dental stone, etc.) used in the study

Figure 2

Shows the measuring device Vernier caliper which was used to measure the intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar width of the participants

Figure 3

Shows alginate impression of maxillary arch (a) and cast prepared (b)

Figure 4

Shows measurement of intercanine width

Figure 5

Shows measurement of interpremolar width

Figure 6

Shows measurement of intermolar width

Graph 1

Comparison of mean values of intercanine width of maxillary arch in males and females

Graph 2

Comparison of mean values of interpremolar width of maxillary arch in males and females

Graph 3

Comparison of mean values of intermolar width of maxillary arch in males and females

Graph 4

Comparison of mean values of combination of the intercanine and interpremolar widths in males and females

Graph 5

Comparison of mean values of combination of the interpremolar and intermolar widths in males and females

Graph 6

Comparison of mean values of combination of the intercanine and intermolar widths in males and females

Graph 7

Comparison of mean values of combination of the intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths in males and females

Graph 8

Comparison of diagnostic performances of all arch widths and combinations of arch widths