World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2024 ) > List of Articles


Correlation of Bite Mark with Bitemporal, Endocanthion, Exocanthion, Bizygomatic, Interalar, Intercommissural, and Bigonial Width from Forensic Perspective: A Clinical Study

Vidyalakshmi Chandrasekar

Keywords : Bite, Crime, Face, Forensic, Three-dimensional

Citation Information : Chandrasekar V. Correlation of Bite Mark with Bitemporal, Endocanthion, Exocanthion, Bizygomatic, Interalar, Intercommissural, and Bigonial Width from Forensic Perspective: A Clinical Study. World J Dent 2024; 15 (2):127-132.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-2382

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 02-04-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Aim: To evaluate and correlate the intercanine distance obtained from the bite mark with the facial landmarks such as bitemporal width (BTW), endocanthion width (ENW), exocanthion width (EXW), bizygomatic width (BZW), interalar width (IAW), intercommissural width (ICW), and bigonial width (BGW). Materials and methods: Bite mark registration was done on 163 subjects satisfying the inclusion criteria and scanned using a three-dimensional (3D) laser scanner to obtain the intercanine distance. A two-dimensional (2D) image of the prominent facial landmarks was captured using a digital camera. The facial landmarks such as BTW, ENW, EXW, BZW, IAW, ICW, and BGW were evaluated from the photographs using photo-imaging software and the values were subjected to statistical analysis using Pearson correlation coefficient and independent-sample t-test. Results: A positive correlation was found between the intercanine distance and the facial landmarks. Minimal difference was observed between the male and female populations. A paired t-test showed that the maximum number of individuals had <5% variability for all the facial landmarks except the EXW width. Conclusion: The intercanine distance obtained from a bite mark can be used as a dependable parameter to predict BTW, ENW, EXW, BZW, IAW, ICW, and BGW. Clinical significance: Bite marks found in a crime scene can be used for the prediction of various facial widths. This information can be useful for identification of the perpetrator.

PDF Share
  1. National Research Council. Strengthening. forensic science in the United States: a path forward. National Academies Press; 2009,29.
  2. James SH, Nordby JJ. Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific and Investigative Techniques, 4th edition. CRC Press; 2014.
  3. Kieser JA, Bernal V, Wadell JN, et al. The uniqueness of the human anterior dentition: a geometric and morphometric analysis. J Forensic Sci 2007;52(3):671–677. DOI: 10.1111/j.1556-4029.2007.00403.x
  4. Lewis C, Marroquin L. Effects of skin elasticity on bite mark distortion. Forensic Sci Int 2015;257:293–296. DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.07.048
  5. Sheasby DR, MacDonald DG. A forensic classification of distortion in human bite marks. Forensic Sci Int 2001;122(1):75–78. DOI: 10.1016/s0379-0738(01)00433-9
  6. Thali MJ, Braun M, Markwalder TH, et al. Bite mark documentation and analysis: the forensic 3D/CAD supported photogrammetry approach. Forensic Sci Int 2003;135(2):115–121. DOI: 10.1016/s0379-0738(03)00205-6
  7. Evans ST, Jones C, Plassmann P. 3D imaging for bite mark analysis. Imag Sci J 2013;61(4):351–360. DOI: 10.1179/1743131X11Y.0000000054
  8. Evans S, Jones C, Plassmann P. 3D imaging in forensic odontology. J Vis Commun Med 2010;33(2):63–68. DOI: 10.3109/17453054.2010.481780
  9. Tripathi S, Singh RD, Chand P, et al. A study to correlate various facial landmarks with intercanine distance. Indian J Dent res 2018;29(4):440–444. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_80_17
  10. Molina A, Martin-de-las-Heras S. Accuracy of 3D scanners in tooth mark analysis. J Forensic Sci 2015;60(Suppl 1):S222–S226. DOI: 10.1111/1556-4029.12598
  11. Gorea RK, Jasuja OP, Abuderman AA, et al. Bite marks on skin and clay: a comparative analysis. Egypt J Forensic Sci 2014;4(4):124–128. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejfs.2014.09.002
  12. Gomes VL, Goncalves LC, do Prado CJ, et al. Correlation between facial measurements and the mesiodistal width of the maxillary anterior teeth. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006;18(4):196–205. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2006.000191.x
  13. Farkas LG, Katic MJ, Forrest CR, et al. International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofac Surg 2005;16(4):615–646. DOI: 10.1097/01.scs.0000171847.58031.9e
  14. Vale GL, Noguchi TT. Anatomical distribution of human bite marks in a series of 67 cases. J Forensic Sci 1983;28(1):61–69.
  15. Ahila SC. Identifying the crime using bite-mark an effective method: a literature review. Ind J Foreign Med Path 2019;12(4):307–311. DOI: 10.21088/ijfmp.0974.3383.124194
  16. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, et al. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 2004;74(3):298–303. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074
  17. Abdullah MA. Inner canthal distance and geometric progression as a predictor of maxillary central incisor width. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88(1):16–20.
  18. Hoffman W Jr, Bomberg TJ, Hatch RA. Interalar width as a guide in denture tooth selection. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55(2):219–221. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(86)90348-3
  19. Sinavarat P, Anunmana C, Hossain S. The relationship of maxillary canines to the facial anatomical landmarks in a group of Thai people. J Adv Prosthodont 2013;5(4):369–373. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2013.5.4.369
  20. Varjao FM, Nogueira SS. Intercommissural width in 4 racial groups as a guide for the selection of maxillary anterior teeth in complete dentures. Int J Prosthodont 2005;18(6):513–515.
  21. Laestadius ND, Aase JM, Smith DW. Normal inner canthal and outer orbital dimensions. J Pediatr 1969;74(3):465–468. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3476(69)80206-4
  22. Murphy KW, Laskin DM. Intercanthal and interpupillary distance in the black population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990;69(6):676–680. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(90)90346-t
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.