These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Can Dermatoglyphics Be Used as a Marker for Predicting Future Malocclusions?
    Author: Eslami N, Jahanbin A, Ezzati A, Banihashemi E, Kianifar H.
    Journal: Electron Physician; 2016 Feb; 8(2):1927-32. PubMed ID: 27054000.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Dermal ridges and craniofacial structures form from the same embryonic tissues during the same embryonic period. Thus, this might indicate a possible association between dermatoglyphics and facial skeletal disorders, such as malocclusions. Early diagnosis of skeletal malocclusions sometimes can prevent future surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to compare the dermatoglyphic characteristics of different malocclusions. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 323 patients who were referred to Orthodontic Department of Mashhad Dental School were recruited. The participants were classified into three groups according to Angle's classification, i.e., Skeletal Class 1 (n = 163), Skeletal Class 2 (n = 111), and Skeletal Class 3 (n = 49). For all participants, we recorded the total ridge counts of each finger (TRC), atd angles, a-b ridge counts, and types of fingerprint patterns. Right- and left-hand asymmetry scores were calculated. The chi-squared test was used to compare the dissimilarity of the types of patterns for each finger. Asymmetry of other parameters was analyzed statistically using the ANOVA or Kruskal-Wallis tests. P-values greater than 0.05 were considered to be significant. RESULTS: A significant difference was determined between Class I and Class III patients in terms of left a-b ridge count (p=0.049). Loop was the most frequent pattern in the three groups, whereas the arch pattern occurred with the lowest frequency. No significant difference was found in the other parameters that were studied. CONCLUSION: Although there were some slight differences in dermatoglyphic peculiarities of different skeletal malocclusions, most of the palm and fingerprint characteristics failed to indicate any significant differences.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]