Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Age estimation in the living: cervical ring apophysis development in a Turkish sample using CT

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Legal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

With increases in migration across borders, age estimation in living individuals of not (reliably) documented identity becomes all the more important. Unfortunately, there are not many age indicators that can be used for this purpose, and human variation requires specific methodical approaches. In this paper, a recently proposed age marker to assess the age around the critical age limit of 18 completed years is tested. The method uses apophyseal development of cervical vertebrae 2, 3 and 4. Here CT scans of a large sample of Turkish individuals (n = 1276) were assessed, and likelihoods of being 18 years at a given stage were calculated. The likelihood of being at least 18 years for stages 0, 1 and 2 were zero or close to zero in both males and females. By the time that stage 4 was reached, the likelihood to be 18 years were between 65 and 70% (depending on the vertebra) in females and 81 and 90% in males. In comparison to South Africans, the Turkish individuals developed earlier, but the likelihoods of being 18 years were lower at stage 4 as some individuals were still judged to be in stage 3 well into their twenties. Although fairly variable, this method is a valuable new addition to the modalities that can be used for age assessment in the living. CT scans seemed to provide good visualization of the structures in question, although in actual forensic cases the high radiation dose may be problematic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schmeling A, Olze A, Reisinger W, Geserick G (2001) Age estimation of living people undergoing criminal proceedings. Lancet 358:89–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05379-X

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schmeling A, Reisinger W, Geserick G, Olze A (2005) The current state of forensic age estimation of live subjects for the purpose of criminal prosecution. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 1:239–246. https://doi.org/10.1385/FSMP:1:4:239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmeling A, Garamendi PM, Prieto JL, Landa MI (2011) Forensic age estimation in unaccompanied minors and young living adults. In: Duarte NV (ed) Forensic medicine—from old problems to new challenges. InTech, Rijeka, pp 77–120 http://www.intechopen.com/books/howtoreference/forensic-medicine-from-old-problems-to-new-challenges/forensic-age-estimation-in-unaccompanied-minors-and-young-living-adults. Accessed 21 May 2020

  4. Uys A, Bernitz H, Pretorius S, Steyn M (2018) Estimating age and the probability of being at least 18 years of age using third molars: a comparison between Black and White individuals living in South Africa. Int J Legal Med 132(5):1437–1446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-018-1877-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lewis JM, Senn DR (2010) Dental age estimation utilizing third molar development: a review of principles, methods, and population studies used in the United States. Forensic Sci Int 201(1–3):79–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.04.042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. The United Nations Refugee Agency (2019) Global Trends, Forced Displacement in 2018. https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2018/. Accessed date:18.05.2020

  7. Ritz-Timme S, Cattaneo C, Collins MJ, Waite ER, Schütz HW, Kaatsch HJ, Borrman HI (2000) Age estimation: the state of the art in relation to the specific demands of forensic practise. Int J Legal Med 113(3):129–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004140050283

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Schmeling A, Grundmann C, Fuhrmann A, Kaatsch HJ, Knell B, Ramsthaler F, Reisinger W, Riepert T, Ritz-Timme S, Rösing FW, Rötzscher K, Geserick G (2008) Criteria for age estimation in living individuals. Int J Legal Med 122(6):457–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-008-0254-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Willems G (2001) A review of the most commonly used dental age estimation techniques. J Forensic Odontostomatol 19:9–17

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Reppien K, Sejrsen B, Lynnerup N (2006) Evaluation of post- mortem estimated dental age versus real age: a retrospective 21- year survey. Forensic Sci Int 159(Suppl 1):S84–S88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.02.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mitchell JC, Roberts GJ, Donaldson ANA, Lucas VS (2009) Dental age assessment (DAA): reference data for British Caucasians at the 16 year threshold. Forensic Sci Int 189(1–3):19–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.04.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Demirjian A, Goldstein H, Tanner JM (1973) A new system of dental age assessment. Hum Biol 45:211–227

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hassel B, Farman AG (1995) Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 107:58–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Liversidge HM, Marsden PH (2010) Estimating age and the likelihood of having attained 18 years of age using mandibular third molars. Br Dent J 209(8):E13. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2010.976

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Panchbhai AS (2011) Dental radiographic indicators, a key to age estimation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 40(4):199–212. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr/19478385

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Thevissen PW, Kaur J, Willems G (2012) Human age estimation combining third molar and skeletal development. Int J Legal Med 126(2):285–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-011-0639-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cunha E, Baccino E, Martrille L, Ramsthaler F, Prieto J, Schuliar Y, Lynnerup N, Cattaneo C (2009) The problem of aging human remains and living individuals: a review. Forensic Sci Int 193:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.09.008

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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(4):238–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016359850142862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Nyström M, Haataja J, Kataja M, Evälahti M, Peck L, Kleemola-Kujala E (1986) Dental maturity in Finnish children, estimated from the development of seven permanent mandibular teeth. Acta Odontol Scand 44(4):193–198. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016358608997720

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Albert AM, Maples WR (1995) Stages of epiphyseal union for thoracic and lumbar vertebral centra as a method of age determination for teenage and young adult skeletons. J Forensic Sci 40:623–633

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Albert AM (1998) The use of vertebral ring epiphyseal union for age estimation in two cases of unknown identity. Forensic Sci Int 97(1):11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0379-0738(98)00143-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Altan M, Dalcı Ö, İşeri H (2012) Growth of the cervical vertebrae in girls from 8 to 17 years. A longitudinal study. Eur J Orthod 34(3):327–334. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr (2002) An improved version of the cervical vertebral maturation method for the assessment of mandibular growth. Angle Orthod 72(4):316–323. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Caldas M d P, Ambrosano GMB, Haiter Neto F (2007) New formula to objectively evaluate skeletal maturation using lateral cephalometric radiographs. Braz Oral Res 21(4):330–335. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242007000400009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Cardoso HFV, Ríos L (2011) Age estimation from stages of epiphyseal union in the presacral vertebrae. Am J Phys Anthropol 144(2):238–247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.21394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Uys A, Bernitz H, Pretorius S, Steyn M (2019) Age estimation from anterior cervical ring apophysis ossification in South Africans. Int J Legal Med 133(6):1935–1948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-019-02137-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nikita E, Nikitas P (2019) Skeletal age-at-death estimation: Bayesian versus regression methods. Forensic Sci Int 297:56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Konigsberg LW, Frankenberg SR, Liversidge HM (2019) Status of mandibular third molar development as evidence in legal age threshold cases. J Forensic Sci 64(3):680–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13926

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schmeling A, Dettmeyer R, Rudolf E, Vieth V, Geserick G (2016) Forensic age estimation: methods, certainty, and the law. Dtsch Arztebl Int 113(4):44–50. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2016.0044

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Altman DG (1991) Practical statistics for medical research, vol 10. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 1635–1636. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780101015

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Schmeling A, Reisinger W, Loreck D, Vendura K, Markus W, Geserick G (2000) Effects of ethnicity on skeletal maturation: consequences for forensic age estimations. Int J Legal Med 113(5):253–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004149900102

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Schmeling A, Olze A, Reisinger W, Geserick G (2005) Forensic age estimation and ethnicity. Legal Med 7:134–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2004.07.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. United Nations Development Programme (2019) Human development report 2019. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2019.pdf. Accessed date:18.05.2020

  34. EASO (2018) Practical guide on age assessment, second edition. Technical report EASO. https://doi.org/10.2847/236187

  35. Ramsthaler F, Proschek P, Betz W, Verhoff MA (2009) How reliable are the risk estimates for X-ray examinations in forensic age estimations ? A safety update. Int J Legal Med 123(3):199–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-009-0322-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Bakirkoy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey

    Elif Hocaoglu & Ercan Inci

  2. Department of Legal Medicine, Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Izmir, Turkey

    Oguzhan Ekizoglu

  3. University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Oguzhan Ekizoglu

  4. Human Variation and Identification Research Unit, School of Anatomical Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Maryna Steyn

  5. Department of Oral Pathology and Oral Biology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, Gauteng, South Africa

    André Uys

Authors
  1. Elif Hocaoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ercan Inci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oguzhan Ekizoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maryna Steyn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. André Uys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oguzhan Ekizoglu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hocaoglu, E., Inci, E., Ekizoglu, O. et al. Age estimation in the living: cervical ring apophysis development in a Turkish sample using CT. Int J Legal Med 134, 2229–2237 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-020-02397-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-020-02397-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation