[Downloaded free from http://www.jpbsonline.org on Tuesday, June 4, 2019, IP: 136.232.8.

34]

Original Article

Role of Orthopantamograph in Forensic Identification: A Retrospective

Study Among Chennai Population
Sriraman Rajkumari, Kotha Nikitha, Sekar Monisha, Sekar Nishagrade, Balakrishnan Thayumanavan, Balasubramaniam
Arunachala Murali

Department of Context: Identification of unknown corpse can be established by their body features

Abstract
Oral Pathology and and belongings; when the features are distorted, it becomes a challenge for the
Microbiology, Sathyabama
Dental College and
forensic experts. Orthopantamograph (OPG) analysis is a simple, noninvasive,
Hospital, Chennai, Tamil economic, and reliable method to sort for identification of the unidentified. Aim and
Nadu, India Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of OPG in age and sex
determination. The objective of our study was to evaluate various measurements on
the mandibular ramus and to correlate them with the age and sex of an individual.
Settings and Design: A retrospective study was conducted using 150 OPGs that were
taken in the Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology using Orthophos XG3
OPG machine. The mandibular ramus measurements were carried out using WebPlot
Digitizer v 4.1. The measurement was statistically assessed. Statistical Analysis Used:
SPSS version 20 was used for discriminate analysis, correlation, and regression
analysis. Results: The male population showed higher values of ramus measurements
compared to the female population. A regression equation was positively drawn to
estimate the age of the unknown individual. Conclusions: Coronoid height is the
main predictive factor in age estimation of an individual irrespective of the gender
whereas gonial angle is the extrapolative tool in gender prediction.
Keywords: Condyle, coronoid, forensic, gonial angle, height orthopantomogram,
mandible, ramus

Introduction Dental College and Hospital (IHEC/study no 050). The

I   dentification and recognition of an individual is
  very critical when the bodies are damaged beyond
recognition.[1] However, age and gender are the prime
sought in the identification process; skeletal components
plays a vital role in the course. Among the skeletal tissue,
skull along with mandible infers a reliable clue.
As the environmental factor influences the characteristics
of skeletal system morphology, there exists enormous
anatomical difference as per the topography variation.
This study focuses on age and gender variation
in mandibular ramus and gonial angle using an
orthopantamograph (OPG) among Chennai population.
Materials and Methods
The study was conducted after obtaining approval from
institutional human ethical committee at Sathyabama
Access this article online
Quick Response Code:
Website: www.jpbsonline.org
OPGs taken in the Department of Oral Medicine and
Radiology for various diagnostic purposes with complete
natural dentition were included in the study, whereas
distorted OPGs, OPG with pathology, jaw discrepancies,
those with jaw discrepancies, or malocclusion (Class II/
Class III) were excluded from the study. Orthophos XG
3 OPG machine was used to make the X-rays.
The study comprised 1000 OPGs out of which only 150
OPGs were subjected to metric assessment considering
the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The participants
Address for correspondence: Dr. Balasubramaniam
Arunachala Murali,
Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology,
Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital,
Chennai 600119, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: dr.charmurali@gmail.com
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows
others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as
­appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com

How to cite this article: Rajkumari S, Nikitha K, Monisha S, Nishagrade S,

Thayumanavan B, Murali BA. Role of orthopantamograph in forensic
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_43_19
identification: A retrospective study among Chennai population. J Pharm
Bioall Sci 2019;11:S393-6.

© 2019 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences  |  Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow S393
[Downloaded free from http://www.jpbsonline.org on Tuesday, June 4, 2019, IP: 136.232.8.34]

Sriraman, et al.: OPG in forensics identification

were between the age range of 3–70 years and they were
classified into seven categories—group 1:  0–10  years,
group 2:  11–20  years, group 3:  21–30  years, group
4:  31–40  years, group 5:  41–50  years, group
6: 51–60 years, and group 7: 61–70 years.
The OPGs were assessed, both left (L) and right
(R) mandibular ramus as well as the gonial angle
measurements were made. The measurements including
maximum ramus width (MaxRW), minimum ramus
width (MinRW), condylar height (ConH), coronoid
height (CorH), projective ramus height (PH), and gonial
angle (A) were recorded bilaterally.[1] All the measurements
were recorded in centimeters using WebPlot Digitizer
v 4.1 software by mouse-driven method. The obtained
values were statistically analyzed with SPSS version 20.
Results
When the measured parameters were statistically
evaluated (t test) for gender differences [Table  1],
MaxRW (R/L), ConH (R/L), CorH (R/L), CorH
(R/L), PH (R/L), and gonial angle (R/L) showed highly
significant differences statistically between the genders
P < 0.01, whereas MinRW (L) and ConH (L) showed
less significance (P < 0.05), and the MinRW (R) did not
show any significant difference.
All the mandibular metric values were statistically
significant (P < 0.01) between the age groups [Table 2]
(analysis of variance), which ranged between 5 and
70 years except for the gonial angle (P < 0.05).
Pearson correlational analysis [Table  3] revealed that
there exists definite correlation between the various age
groups and mandibular linear measurements but not
with the gonial angle.
Multiple linear regression analysis shows the CorH
(R/L), MaxRW (R), and gonial angle (R) are significant
parameters contributing to the prediction of age of
an individual and the equation for age estimation
is AGE = −190.68 + 1.065 [MaxRW (R)] − 0.605
[CorH (R)] + 1.766 [CorH (L)] + 0.925 [A (R)] + µ
Discussion
Most often, dentists are sought by the forensic experts
in case of mass fatalities and situations where ambiguity
over personal identification arises mainly related to
the age and gender discrimination. Though there exist
variety of methods to for the same, OPG can be applied
when the external features are distorted.
Various studies had been conducted by many researchers
to understand the applicability of mandibular metric
analysis specifically the vertical, horizontal, and
angular measurements[2-6] in forensic odontology.
Our study reveals that CorH, ConH, and projected
height of the mandible increase with age, and at
sixth decade, there is slight reduction in values, but
the studies by Leversha et  al.[1] and Poongodi et  al.,[7]
show a decrease in ramus height with increase in age.
The gonial angle did not show significant difference
with age, which is similar to the study by Taleb and
Beshlawy[5] but the mean value increased in the early
age as well as in the sixth decade; however, other studies
report that there is significant difference with age.[2,5,7]
Studies by Taleb and Beshlawy[5] and Sandeepa et al.[6]
reveal that CorH shows fluctuation with aging, which is
parallel to our study.
There is statistically significant difference in all the
measurements of mandible between the genders except

Table 1: Statistical test for significance between the genders (t test)

Parameters Male Female t value Significance
MaxRW (R) 36.63 ± 0.38 35.08 ± 0.37 2.94 0.004**
MaxRW (L) 36.36 ± 0.35 34.45 ± 0.40 3.59 0.000**
MinRW (R) 31.66 ± 0.32 30.97 ± 0.33 1.47 0.142 NS
MinRW (L) 31.85 ± 0.30 30.74 ± 0.34 2.42 0.016*
ConH (R) 64.87 ± 0.83 61.72 ± 0.73 2.85 0.005**
ConH (L) 64.20 ± 0.88 61.65 ± 0.71 2.26 0.025*
CorH (R) 65.59 ± 0.92 59.22 ± 0.76 5.40 0.000**
CorH (L) 64.39 ± 0.86 58.35 ± 0.72 5.41 0.000**
PH (R) 65.51 ± 0.92 60.33 ± 0.77 4.31 0.000**
PH (L) 65.43 ± 0.89 60.45 ± 0.73 4.34 0.000**
A (R) 122.45 ± 0.56 125.74 ± 0.64 −3.85 0.000**
A (L) 122.33 ± 0.49 125.84 ± 0.61 −4.41 0.000**
L = left , R = right, MaxRW = maximum ramus width, MinRW = minimum ramus width, ConH = condylar height,
CorH = coronoid height, PH = projective ramus height, A = gonial angle, NS = nonsignificant
**Significant at P < 0.01
*Significant at P < 0.05

S394 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences  ¦  Volume 11  ¦  Supplement 2  ¦  May 2019
[Downloaded free from http://www.jpbsonline.org on Tuesday, June 4, 2019, IP: 136.232.8.34]

Sriraman, et al.: OPG in forensics identification

Table 2: Statistical test for significance (analysis of variance) between each age group for various parameters
Parameters Age group 1 Age group 2 Age group 3 Age group 4 Age group 5 Age group 6 Age group 7 F value Significance
MaxRW (R) 30.01 ± 0.54 36.44 ± 0.55 36.81 ± 0.54 37.42 ± 0.55 36.17 ± 0.62 38.06 ± 0.20 36.74 ± 0.27 28.85 0.000**
MaxRW (L) 30.21 ± 0.60 36.55 ± 0.63 35.74 ± 0.61 36.28 ± 0.45 35.07 ± 0.87 37.80 ± 0.20 36.79 ± 0.25 19.14 0.000**
MinRW (R) 28.55 ± 0.53 32.17 ± 0.55 32.43 ± 0.64 30.45 ± 0.48 30.70 ± 0.73 32.69 ± 0.36 32.24 ± 0.42 7.50 0.000**
MinRW (L) 28.51 ± 0.54 32.00 ± 0.61 31.88 ± 0.61 30.94 ± 0.47 30.30 ± 0.73 33.16 ± 0.34 32.44 ± 0.28 7.70 0.000**
ConH (R) 49.82 ± 1.09 64.07 ± 0.89 66.89 ± 0.99 64.87 ± 0.66 66.64 ± 1.24 70.46 ± 0.57 62.11 ± 0.43 53.59 0.000**
ConH (L) 49.95 ± 1.09 62.90 ± 0.96 67.21 ± 1.00 64.61 ± 0.59 66.10 ± 1.24 68.62 ± 1.50 62.75 ± 0.49 39.49 0.000**
CorH (R) 47.84 ± 1.30 63.43 ± 0.96 64.38 ± 1.11 67.87 ± 1.21 62.94 ± 1.32 69.17 ± 0.88 62.44 ± 0.51 41.646 0.000**
CorH (L) 47.99 ± 1.23 60.93 ± 1.01 62.64 ± 1.04 66.08 ± 1.06 63.40 ± 1.29 68.84 ± 0.86 61.93 ± 0.48 40.05 0.000**
PH (R) 48.88 ± 1.26 62.44 ± 1.05 66.34 ± 1.05 66.86 ± 1.17 65.83 ± 1.35 70.72 ± 0.67 61.00 ± 0.28 43.84 0.000**
PH (L) 49.48 ± 1.13 61.97 ± 1.02 66.44 ± 1.04 67.11 ± 1.14 65.28 ± 1.29 70.35 ± 0.73 61.52 ± 0.37 43.72 0.000**
A (R) 125.91 ± 1.23 124.25 ± 1.23 123.00 ± 0.99 123.94 ± 0.89 123.26 ± 1.81 123.23 ± 1.05 125.70 ± 0.83 1.03 0.408 NS
A (L) 125.53 ± 1.14 124.58 ± 1.21 124.03 ± 0.97 124.51 ± 0.80 122.34 ± 1.75 123.05 ± 0.83 124.42 ± 0.68 0.83 0.552 NS
L = left , R = right, MaxRW = maximum ramus width, MinRW = minimum ramus width, ConH = condylar height,
CorH = coronoid height, PH = projective ramus height, A = gonial angle, NS = nonsignificant
**Significant at P < 0.01

Table 3: Pearson correlational analysis of the mandibular measurements with age

MaxRW (R) MaxRW (L) MinRW (R) MinRW (L) ConH (R) ConH (L) CorH (R) CorH (L) PH (R) PH (L) A (R) A (L)
0.459** 0.415** 0.229** 0.279** 0.469** 0.454** 0.464** 0.526** 0.459** 0.467** −0.03(NS) −0.11(NS)
L = left , R = right, MaxRW = maximum ramus width, MinRW = minimum ramus width, ConH = condylar height,
CorH = coronoid height, PH = projective ramus height, A = gonial angle, NS = nonsignificant
**Significant at P < 0.01

for the minimal ramus width and ConH, which had no
significance/very less significance in gender prediction
that contradicts few other studies where the minimal
ramus breadth and ConH [7-9] had a greatest sexual
dimorphism[3,4,10]; however, the prediction about MinRW
coincides with the findings of Sandeepa et al.[6] Damera et
al.,[8] states that the projected ramus height is considered
as a relevant factor in gender discrimination which is
similar to our study. The gonial angle had differences
between the male and female, which contradicts the
studies conducted by Leversha et al.,[1] Sandeepa et al.,[6]
Al-Shamout et al.,[2,11] but our conclusion is similar to
other studies[5,8,9] where female had higher values of
gonial angle than male; however, the study by Sandeepa
et al.[6] reveals male had greater gonial angle. There was
no difference between the right and left side gonial angle
similar to other studies[2]
Conclusion
The use of OPGs in dentistry is not only limited to
disease diagnosis and treatment planning; the varied
anatomical landmarks reach the interest of forensic
odontologist and hence mandibular metric values
are proved to be a definite variable in gender and age
determination. All the studies confirm that males have
a significantly higher values compared to females[2-11]
with a variation in the metric values among various
age groups. However, the evaluation of mandible
using OPG was assessed by many researchers for its
forensic applications. Standard metric values for each
population must be drawn and archived in future for
convenience and instant reporting.
Acknowledgement
We thank Dr Pravda MDS, Head of the Department,
Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology,
Sathyabama Dental College and Hospital, Chennai,
for her kind support in providing the OPG’s from the
Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology..
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Leversha J, McKeough G, Myrteza A, Skjellrup-Wakefiled H,
Welsh J, Sholapurkar A. Age and gender correlation of gonial angle,
ramus height and bigonial width in dentate subjects in a dental
school in far North Queensland. J Clin Exp Dent 2016;8:e49-54.
2. Indira AP, Markande A, David MP. Mandibular ramus:  An
indicator for sex determination—A digital radiographic study.
J Forensic Dent Sci 2012;4:58-62.
3. Maloth KN, Kundoor VK, Vishnumolakala SL, Kesidi S,
Lakshmi MV, Thakur M. Mandibular ramus: A predictor for
sex determination—A digital radiographic study. J Indian Acad
Oral Med Radiol 2017;29:242-6.

Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences  ¦  Volume 11  ¦  Supplement 2  ¦  May 2019 S395
[Downloaded free from http://www.jpbsonline.org on Tuesday, June 4, 2019, IP: 136.232.8.34]

Sriraman, et al.: OPG in forensics identification

4. Linganna CS, Hemanth Raj MN. Orthopantomograph:  A
possible predictor of age and gender. Int J Rec Trend Sci
Technol 2015;14:470-3.
5. Taleb NSA, Beshlawy ME. Mandibular ramus and gonial angle
measurements as predictors of sex and age in an Egyptian
population sample. A digital panoramic study. J Forensic Res
2015;6:308.
6. Sandeepa NC, Ganem AA, Alqhtani WA, Mousa YM,
Abdullah EK, Alkhayri AH. Mandibular indices for gender
prediction: A retrospective study in Saudi population. J Dent
Oral Health 2017;3:095.
7. Poongodi V, Kanmani R, Anandi MS, Krithika CL, Kannan
A, Raghuram PH. Prediction of age and gender using digital
radiographic method: A retrospective study. J Pharm Bioallied
Sci 2015;7:S504-8.
8. Damera A, Mohanalakhsmi J, Yellarthi PK, Rezwana
BM. Radiographic evaluation of mandibular ramus for
gender estimation:  Retrospective study. J Forensic Dent Sci
2016;8:74-8.
9. Jambunath U, Govindraju P, Balaji P, Poornima C, Latha S,
Former. Sex determination by using mandibular ramus and
gonial angle—a preliminary comparative study. Int J Contem
Med Res 2016;3:3278-80.
10. Kumar BS, Deepthi BC. A digital radiographic study for
gender prediction using mandibular indices. Int J Sci Res
2016;5:1490-3.
11. Al-Shamout R, Ammoush M, Alrbata R, Habahbah AA.
Age and gender differences in gonial angle, ramus height and
bigonial width in dentate subjects. Pakistan Oral Dent J 2012;32:
81-7.

S396 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences  ¦  Volume 11  ¦  Supplement 2  ¦  May 2019