Öz
Amaç: Cinsiyet ayrımı açısından öne çıkan anatomik bölgelerden birisi yüz bölgesi ve bu bölgeyi oluşturan kemik yapılardır. Yapılan çalışmalar yüz bölgesindeki genişlik ölçülerinin, özellikle de bizigomatik genişliğin önemli bir cinsiyet ayırıcı değişken olduğunu ortaya koymakla birlikte üst yüz bölgesini oluşturan diğer elemanlar bu açıdan yeterince incelenmemiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, üst yüz bölgesini mercek altına alarak, görece az incelenmiş genişlik ölçülerinin cinsiyet ayrımında kullanılıp kullanılamayacağı sorusuna cevap aramaktır.
Yöntem: Bu çerçevede, yaşları 18 ve 75 arasında değişen 200 yetişkin bireyin (100 kadın, 100 erkek) BT (bilgisayarlı tomografi) görüntüsü üzerinden 5 genişlik ölçüsü alınmıştır. Bu ölçüler şunlardır: (1) bimalar (interzigomatik) genişlik, (2) bizigomaksiller genişlik, (3) orbital genişlik, (4) biorbital genişlik ve (5) interorbital genişlik. Ölçülerin seksüel dimorfizm dereceleri, tek değişkenli ve çok değişkenli diskriminant fonksiyonları oluşturularak analiz edilmiştir.
Bulgular: Analiz sonuçları, tek değişkenli fonksiyonların cinsiyeti doğru belirleme oranının %63.5 ila %76.5 arasında değiştiğini ortaya koymuştur. Cinsiyeti en iyi ayıran değişkenler sırasıyla bimalar (interzigomatik) genişlik (%76.5) ve biorbital genişliktir (%73). Cinsiyetleri doğru olarak ayıran en başarılı çok değişkenli fonksiyonda bimalar genişlik ve orbital genişlik olup, bu eşitliğin cinsiyeti doğru belirleme oranı %77 olarak tespit edilmiştir.
Sonuç: Bulgular, üst yüz ve orbita bölgesindeki genişlik ölçülerinin cinsiyet belirlemedeki başarısının orta seviyede olduğunu, dolayısıyla pelvisi oluşturan kemik elemanların ele geçmediği durumlarda üst yüz bölgesindeki genişlik ölçülerine başvurulabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Ubelaker DH, Buikstra JE. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series, 44; 1994.
- Atamtürk D. Adli antropoloji: insan iskeletinden kimlik tespiti. İstanbul: İstanbul Tıp Kitabevi; 2016.
- Ogawa Y, Imaizumi K, Miyasaka S, Yoshino M. Discriminant functions for sex estimation of modern Japanese skulls. J Forensic Leg Med. 2013;20(4):234-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2012.09.023
- Bass WM. Human osteology: A laboratory and field manual. 5th ed. Columbia: Missouri Archaeological Society; 2005.
- Pickering RB, Bachman DC. The use of forensic anthropology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1997. https://doi. org/10.1201/9781439834329
- Spradley MK, Jantz RL. Sex estimation in forensic anthropology: skull versus postcranial elements. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(2):289-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01635.x
- White TD, Black MT, Folkens PA. Human osteology. 3rd ed. Burlington: Academic Press; 2012.
- Rossi AC, Azevedo FHS, Freire AR, Gruppo FC, Junior ED, Caria PHF, Prado FB. Orbital aperture morphometry in Brazilian population by postero-anterior caldwell radiographs. J Forensic Leg Med. 2012;19(8):470-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2012.04.019
- Steyn M, İşcan MY. Sexual dimorphism in the crania and mandibles of South African whites. Forensic Sci Int. 1998;98(1-2):9-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(98)00120-0
- Kranioti EF, İşcan MY, Michalodimitrakis M. Craniometric analysis of the modern Cretan population. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;180(2-3):1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.06.018
- Rogers TL. Determining the sex of human remains through cranial morphology. J Forensic Sci. 2005;50(3):493-500. https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS2003385
- Franklin D, Cardini A, Flavel A, Kuliukas A. Estimation of sex from cranial measurements in a Western Australian population. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;229(1-3):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.03.005
- Ekizoglu O, Hocaoglu E, Inci E, Can IO, Solmaz D, Aksoy S, Buran CF, Sayın I. Assessment of sex in a modern Turkish population using cranial anthropometric parameters. Legal Med. 2016;21:45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2016.06.001
- Olivier G. Practical anthropology. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher; 1969.
- Hefner JT. Cranial nonmetric variation and estimating ancestry. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(5): 985-995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01118.x
- Langley NR, Meadows Jantz L, Ousley SD, Jantz RL, Milner G. Data collection procedures for forensic skeletal material 2.0. Knoxville (TN): The University of Tennessee; 2016.
- Kaya A, Uygun S, Eraslan C, Akar GC, Kocak A, Aktas E, Govsa F. Sex estimation: 3D CTA-scan based on orbital measurements in Turkish population. Rom J Leg Med. 2014;22(4): 257-262. https://doi.org/10.4323/rjlm.2014.257
- Saini V, Srivastava R, Rai RK, Shamal SN, Singh TB, Tripathi SK. An osteometric study of northern Indian populations for sexual dimorphism in craniofacial region. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(3):700-705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01707.x
- Mustafa A, Abusamra H, Kanaan N, Alselam M, Allouh M, Kalbouneh H. Morphometric study of the facial skeleton in Jordanians: a computed tomography scan-based study. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;302:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.109916
- Radman C. Sex estimation of Croatian population based on CT scans of the craniums. [Doctoral Thesis]. Croatia: University of Split; 2020.
- Mehta M, Saini V, Nath S, Menon SK. CT scan images for sex discrimination-a preliminary study on Gujarati population. J Forensic Radiol Imag. 2015;3:43-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jofri.2014.11.009
- Amamoorthy B, Pai MM, Ullal S, Prabhu LV. Discriminant function analysis of craniometric traits for sexual dimorphism and its implication in forensic anthropology. J Anat Soc Ind. 2020;68(4):260-268. https://doi.org/10.4103/JASI.JASI_82_19
Öz
Objective: The face is one of the anatomical parts that is crucial in terms of sex estimation. By focusing on the upper face region, the goal of this study is to find an answer to the question of whether the relatively under-examined breadth measures can be employed in sex estimation.
Method: In order to achieve this aim, 5 width measurements were taken on CT (computerized tomography) images of 200 adult individuals (100 women, 100 men) aged between 18 and 75. These measures are: (1) bimalar (interzygomatic) width, (2) bizygomaxillary width, (3) orbital width, (4) biorbital width, and (5) interorbital width. The degrees of sexual dimorphism of the measures were analyzed by constructing univariate and multivariate discriminant functions.
Results: The ratio of correct allocation of sex by univariate functions ranged from 63.5% to 76.5%. It was determined that the variables that best the discriminator of sex were bimalar (interzygomatic) width (76.5%) and biorbital width (73%), respectively. The function contains bimalar width and orbital width was the most successful multivariate equation in properly differentiating the sexes, with a sex determination rate of 77%.
Conclusion: Findings reveal that the success of the width measurements in the upper face and orbital region is at a moderate level, therefore, in the medico-legal examinations the width measurements of the upper face region can be applied in cases where the bone elements forming the pelvis are not found.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Forensic medicine forensic anthropology sex determination Orbital Area
Kaynakça
- Ubelaker DH, Buikstra JE. Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey Research Series, 44; 1994.
- Atamtürk D. Adli antropoloji: insan iskeletinden kimlik tespiti. İstanbul: İstanbul Tıp Kitabevi; 2016.
- Ogawa Y, Imaizumi K, Miyasaka S, Yoshino M. Discriminant functions for sex estimation of modern Japanese skulls. J Forensic Leg Med. 2013;20(4):234-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2012.09.023
- Bass WM. Human osteology: A laboratory and field manual. 5th ed. Columbia: Missouri Archaeological Society; 2005.
- Pickering RB, Bachman DC. The use of forensic anthropology. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1997. https://doi. org/10.1201/9781439834329
- Spradley MK, Jantz RL. Sex estimation in forensic anthropology: skull versus postcranial elements. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(2):289-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2010.01635.x
- White TD, Black MT, Folkens PA. Human osteology. 3rd ed. Burlington: Academic Press; 2012.
- Rossi AC, Azevedo FHS, Freire AR, Gruppo FC, Junior ED, Caria PHF, Prado FB. Orbital aperture morphometry in Brazilian population by postero-anterior caldwell radiographs. J Forensic Leg Med. 2012;19(8):470-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2012.04.019
- Steyn M, İşcan MY. Sexual dimorphism in the crania and mandibles of South African whites. Forensic Sci Int. 1998;98(1-2):9-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0379-0738(98)00120-0
- Kranioti EF, İşcan MY, Michalodimitrakis M. Craniometric analysis of the modern Cretan population. Forensic Sci Int. 2008;180(2-3):1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2008.06.018
- Rogers TL. Determining the sex of human remains through cranial morphology. J Forensic Sci. 2005;50(3):493-500. https://doi.org/10.1520/JFS2003385
- Franklin D, Cardini A, Flavel A, Kuliukas A. Estimation of sex from cranial measurements in a Western Australian population. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;229(1-3):1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.03.005
- Ekizoglu O, Hocaoglu E, Inci E, Can IO, Solmaz D, Aksoy S, Buran CF, Sayın I. Assessment of sex in a modern Turkish population using cranial anthropometric parameters. Legal Med. 2016;21:45-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2016.06.001
- Olivier G. Practical anthropology. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas Publisher; 1969.
- Hefner JT. Cranial nonmetric variation and estimating ancestry. J Forensic Sci. 2009;54(5): 985-995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01118.x
- Langley NR, Meadows Jantz L, Ousley SD, Jantz RL, Milner G. Data collection procedures for forensic skeletal material 2.0. Knoxville (TN): The University of Tennessee; 2016.
- Kaya A, Uygun S, Eraslan C, Akar GC, Kocak A, Aktas E, Govsa F. Sex estimation: 3D CTA-scan based on orbital measurements in Turkish population. Rom J Leg Med. 2014;22(4): 257-262. https://doi.org/10.4323/rjlm.2014.257
- Saini V, Srivastava R, Rai RK, Shamal SN, Singh TB, Tripathi SK. An osteometric study of northern Indian populations for sexual dimorphism in craniofacial region. J Forensic Sci. 2011;56(3):700-705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.01707.x
- Mustafa A, Abusamra H, Kanaan N, Alselam M, Allouh M, Kalbouneh H. Morphometric study of the facial skeleton in Jordanians: a computed tomography scan-based study. Forensic Sci Int. 2019;302:1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.109916
- Radman C. Sex estimation of Croatian population based on CT scans of the craniums. [Doctoral Thesis]. Croatia: University of Split; 2020.
- Mehta M, Saini V, Nath S, Menon SK. CT scan images for sex discrimination-a preliminary study on Gujarati population. J Forensic Radiol Imag. 2015;3:43-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jofri.2014.11.009
- Amamoorthy B, Pai MM, Ullal S, Prabhu LV. Discriminant function analysis of craniometric traits for sexual dimorphism and its implication in forensic anthropology. J Anat Soc Ind. 2020;68(4):260-268. https://doi.org/10.4103/JASI.JASI_82_19
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | Türkçe |
|---|---|
| Konular | Klinik Tıp Bilimleri, Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi |
| Bölüm | Original Articles |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 15 Aralık 2022 |
| Gönderilme Tarihi | 11 Kasım 2021 |
| Kabul Tarihi | 25 Nisan 2022 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2022 Cilt: 13 Sayı: 47 |
