International Journal of Legal Medicine

, Volume 129, Issue 1, pp 165–169

Classifying stages of third molar development: crown length as a predictor for the mature root length

Original Article

Abstract

Multiple tooth development staging techniques were reported based on arbitrarily set borderlines between succeeding stages. Anatomic tooth features or predictions of future tooth part dimensions were described to identify the thresholds between the established stages. The need to predict mature tooth dimensions, while the tooth considered is still in development, is a drawback to use this staging technique for dental age estimations. Using the fully mature crown length as a predictor for the future root length could provide a tool for undisputable staging. The aim of this study was first to measure the crown and root length of fully mature third molars and second to investigate whether the crown length could be used as a predictor of the root length, in order to classify the observed root length as a proportion of the future mature root. The crown and root lengths of all present third molars were digitally measured on dental panoramic radiographs of 1,000 subjects. The included subjects were equally distributed in gender, and their age ranged between 22 and 40 years. Two occlusal borders, the cement enamel junction and the root apices, were defined as landmarks for standardized measurements. Regression models with root length as response and crown length as predictor were established and revealed low R2 and high RMSE values. Due to the small explained variance by the prediction models and the high variation in prediction errors, the observed crown length cannot be used to predict the final root length of a developing third molar.

Keywords

Forensic science Forensic odontology Dental age estimation Third molar development stages Crown and root length 

References

  1. 1.
    Gleiser I, Hunt E (1955) The permanent first molar: its calcification, eruption and decay. Am J Phys Anthropol 13:253–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Demisch A, Wartmann P (1956) Calcification of the mandibular third molar and its relation to skeletal and chronological age in children. Child Dev 27(4):459–473PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garn S, Lewis A, Koski K, Polacheck D (1958) The sex difference in tooth calcification. J Dent Res 37(3):561–567PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moorrees CFA, Fanning EA, Hunt EE (1963) Age variation of formation stages for ten permanent teeth. J Dent Res 42:1490–1502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM (1973) A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol 42:211–227Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gustafson G, Koch G (1974) Age estimation up to 16 years of age based on dental development. Odontol Rev 25:297–306Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Häävikko K (1974) Tooth formation age estimated on a few selected teeth. A simple method for clinical use. Proc Finn Dent Soc 70:15–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Engström C, Engström H, Sagne S (1983) Lower third molar development in relation to skeletal maturity and chronological age. Angle Orthod 53(2):97–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nortjé C (1983) The permanent mandibular third molar. Its value in age determination. J Forensic Odontostomatol 1(1):27–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris MJP, Nortje CJ (1984) The mesial root of the third mandibular molar. A possible indicator of age. J Forensic Odontostomatol 2:39–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Raungpaka S (1988) The study of tooth-developmental age of Thai children in Bangkok. J Dent Assoc Thail 38:72–81Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kullman L, Johanson G, Akesson L (1992) Root development of the lower third molar and its relation to chronological age. Swed Dent J 16:161–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Köhler S, Schmelzle RL, Püschel K (1994) Development of wisdom teeth as a criterion of age determination. Ann Anat 176:339–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Orhan K, Ozer L, Orhan AI, Dogan S, Paksoy CS (2007) Radiographic evaluation of third molar development in relation to chronological age among Turkish children and youth. Forensic Sci Int 165(1):46–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thevissen P, Fieuws S, Willems G (2011) Third molar development: measurements versus scores as age predictor. Arch Oral Biol 56:1035–1040PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Levesque Y, Demirjian A (1980) The inter-examiner variation in rating dental formation from radiographs. J Dent Res 59:1123–1126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kullman K, Tronje G, Teivens A, Lundholm (1996) A methods of reducing observer variation in age estimation from panoramic radiograph. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 25:173–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nykänen R, Espeland L, Kvaal SI, Krogstad O (1998) Validity of the Demirjian method for dental age estimation when applied to Norwegian children. Acta Odontol Scand 56:238–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leurs IH, Wattel E, Aartman IAH, Etty E, Prahl-Andersen B (2005) Dental age in Dutch children. Eur J Orthod 27:309–314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dhanjal K, Bhardwaj M, Liversidge H (2006) Reproducibility of radiographic stage assessment of third molars. Forensic Sci Int 159:S74–S77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harrell F (2001) Regression modeling strategies. Springer, New-YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Viciano J, López-Lázaro S, Alemán I (2013) Sex estimation based on deciduous and permanent dentition in a contemporary Spanish population. Am J Phys Anthropol 152(1):31–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bharti A, Angadi PV, Kale AD, Hallikerimath SR (2011) Efficacy of “Dimodent” sex predictive equation assessed in an Indian population. J Forensic Odontostomatol 29(1):51–56PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Prabhu S, Acharya AB (2009) Odontometric sex assessment in Indians. Forensic Sci Int 192(1–3):129PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Acharya AB, Mainali S (2008) Sex discrimination potential of buccolingual and mesiodistal tooth dimensions. J Forensic Sci 53(4):790–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Garn SM, Cole PE, Wainwright RL, Guire KE (1997) Sex discriminatory effectiveness using combinations of permanent teeth. J Dent Res 56(6):697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Potter RH (1972) Univariate versus multivariate differences in tooth size according to sex. J Dent Res 51(3):716–722PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zorba E, Vanna V, Moraitis K (2013) Sexual dimorphism of root length on a Greek population sample. HomoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Forensic Odontology, Department of Oral Health Sciences, KU Leuven and DentistryUniversity Hospitals LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations