Cargando…

Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare lip prints and palatal rugae pattern in Kerala, Karnataka, and Manipuri population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved 180 individuals (60 each from Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri population). Lipstick was used to record l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manikya, Sangameshwar, Sureka, V., Prasanna, M. D., Ealla, Krantikiran, Reddy, Sridhar, Bindu, Padala Swetha
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6187882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430072
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_223_18
_version_ 1783363107240804352
author Manikya, Sangameshwar
Sureka, V.
Prasanna, M. D.
Ealla, Krantikiran
Reddy, Sridhar
Bindu, Padala Swetha
author_facet Manikya, Sangameshwar
Sureka, V.
Prasanna, M. D.
Ealla, Krantikiran
Reddy, Sridhar
Bindu, Padala Swetha
author_sort Manikya, Sangameshwar
collection PubMed
description AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare lip prints and palatal rugae pattern in Kerala, Karnataka, and Manipuri population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved 180 individuals (60 each from Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri population). Lipstick was used to record lip prints, which were visualized by magnifying lens. Palatal rugae were recorded on maxillary casts of all subjects and analyzed following Kapali S et al.’ s classification. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 for Windows software was used for analysis. RESULTS: Among the study population, most frequent lip print pattern was Type 3 and least was Type 1’. When patterns were compared between groups, Type 3 was the most common in Manipuri and Kerala and Type 3 in Karnataka groups. In the entire population, males showed Type 3 and females showed Type 1. On analysis of overall rugae wavy, forward and divergence patterns were predominant. On comparison of gender, males demonstrated greater number of wavy and perpendicular rugae, and females had curved, straight, forward, and backward. CONCLUSION: Both cheiloscopy and rugoscopy have the prospective to recognize an individual. Cheiloscopy is more reliable than rugoscopy in making out the group and gender of an individual.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6187882
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61878822018-11-14 Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population Manikya, Sangameshwar Sureka, V. Prasanna, M. D. Ealla, Krantikiran Reddy, Sridhar Bindu, Padala Swetha J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Original Article AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare lip prints and palatal rugae pattern in Kerala, Karnataka, and Manipuri population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study involved 180 individuals (60 each from Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri population). Lipstick was used to record lip prints, which were visualized by magnifying lens. Palatal rugae were recorded on maxillary casts of all subjects and analyzed following Kapali S et al.’ s classification. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20 for Windows software was used for analysis. RESULTS: Among the study population, most frequent lip print pattern was Type 3 and least was Type 1’. When patterns were compared between groups, Type 3 was the most common in Manipuri and Kerala and Type 3 in Karnataka groups. In the entire population, males showed Type 3 and females showed Type 1. On analysis of overall rugae wavy, forward and divergence patterns were predominant. On comparison of gender, males demonstrated greater number of wavy and perpendicular rugae, and females had curved, straight, forward, and backward. CONCLUSION: Both cheiloscopy and rugoscopy have the prospective to recognize an individual. Cheiloscopy is more reliable than rugoscopy in making out the group and gender of an individual. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 2018-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6187882/ /pubmed/30430072 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_223_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Manikya, Sangameshwar
Sureka, V.
Prasanna, M. D.
Ealla, Krantikiran
Reddy, Sridhar
Bindu, Padala Swetha
Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title_full Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title_fullStr Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title_short Comparison of Cheiloscopy and Rugoscopy in Karnataka, Kerala, and Manipuri Population
title_sort comparison of cheiloscopy and rugoscopy in karnataka, kerala, and manipuri population
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6187882/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30430072
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_223_18
work_keys_str_mv AT manikyasangameshwar comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation
AT surekav comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation
AT prasannamd comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation
AT eallakrantikiran comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation
AT reddysridhar comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation
AT bindupadalaswetha comparisonofcheiloscopyandrugoscopyinkarnatakakeralaandmanipuripopulation