Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Forensic Odontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia. Electronic address: arofi.kurniawan@fkg.unair.ac.id
  • 2 Department of Forensic Odontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia
  • 3 Faculty of Sciences of Life and Health, School of Dentistry, Digital Dentistry Lab, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru
  • 4 Department of Forensic Odontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia; Department of Basic Sciences and Oral Biology, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 5 Department of Forensic Odontology, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya, Indonesia; Institute of Pathology, Laboratory and Forensic Medicine (I-PPerForM) and Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Malaysia
  • 6 Department Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Puthisastra, Phnom Penh, Cambodia; Center for Transdisciplinary Research, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Science, Saveetha University, Chennai, India
Leg Med (Tokyo), 2024 Mar;67:102399.
PMID: 38219704 DOI: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2024.102399

Abstract

The field of bitemark analysis involves examining physical alterations in a medium resulting from contact with teeth and other oral structures. Various techniques, such as 2D and 3D imaging, have been developed in recent decades to ensure precise analysis of bitemarks. This study assessed the precision of using a smartphone camera to generate 3D models of bitemark patterns. A 3D model of the bite mark pattern was created using 3Shape TRIOSTM and a smartphone camera combined with monoscopic photogrammetry. The mesiodistal dimensions of the anterior teeth were measured using Rapidform Explorer and OrtogOnBlender, and the collected data were analyzed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics version 23.0. The mean mesiodistal dimension of the anterior teeth, as measured on the 3D model from 3Shape TRIOSTM and smartphone cameras, was found to be 6.95 ± 0.7667 mm and 6.94 ± 0.7639 mm, respectively. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between the two measurement methods, p > 0.05. The outcomes derived from this study unequivocally illustrate that a smartphone camera possessing the specific parameters detailed in this study can create a 3D representation of bite patterns with an accuracy level on par with the outputs of a 3D intraoral camera. These findings underscore the promising trajectory of merging smartphone cameras and monoscopic photogrammetry techniques, positioning them as a budget-friendly avenue for 3D bitemark analysis. Notably, the monoscopic photogrammetry methodology assumes substantial significance within forensic odontology due to its capacity for precise 3D reconstructions and the preservation of critical measurement data.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.