Gender-specific differences in the anthropometric characteristics of the distal femur and proximal tibia condyles
Abstract
Background/Aim. In the course of identification, skeletal remains are used to determine the gender, age, and height of the body. The pelvic bone, skull, and femur were commonly used to determine gender; however, modern radiology techniques have enabled the use of other bones of the skeletal system (all long bones, scapula, clavicle, metacarpal and metatarsal bones, vertebras, ribs, etc.). The aim of this study was to determine whether certain anthropometric characteristics of the distal femur and proximal tibia are indicative of gender differences. Methods. The respective research has been carried out between 2011 and 2014 at the Institute of Pathology and Forensic Medicine and Institute of Radiology of the Military Medical Academy in Belgrade on 203 subjects (152 men and 50 women), between 11 and 63 years of age (35.50 ± 12.98). Diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) imaging of the living persons’ knees was used. Measures taken included the longest mediolateral diameter of the distal femur condyle, the mediolateral diameter of the proximal tibia condyle and the diameter of the proximal tibia intercondylar eminence. Descriptive statistics and the Student's t-test were used for statistical analyses of data. Results. The mediolateral diameter of the distal femur in men was from 7.70 cm to 9.70 cm (8.80 ± 0.39 cm), and in women from 6.60 cm to 8.50 cm (7.62 ± 0.39 cm). The mediolateral diameter of the proximal tibia in men was from 7.20 cm to 9.30 cm (8.09 ± 0.38 cm), and in women from 5.90 cm to 8.00 cm (7.04 ± 0.36 cm). The mediolateral diameter of the proximal tibia intercondylar eminence in men was from 1.00 cm to 2.30 cm (1.44 ± 0.21 cm), and in women from 0.90 cm to 2.00 cm (1.33 ± 0.21 cm). The measures obtained showed a gender-specific statistically significant difference. Conclusion. The mediolateral diameters of the distal femur condyle, proximal tibia condyle and proximal tibia intercondylar eminence are indicative of gender-specific differences and may be used in the procedure of determining gender based on skeletal remains.
References
Krishan K. Anthropometry in forensic medicine and forensic science-Forensic Anthropometry. Internet J Forensic Sci 2007; 2(1): 6.
Galloway A, Simmons TL. Education in Forensic Anthropolo-gy: appraisal and outlook. J Forensic Sci 1997; 42(5): 796‒801.
Timonov P, Fasova A, Badiani K, Radoinova D, Alexandrov A. Sex determination from the femur in a Bulgarian modern popula-tion. Anil Aggraw Intern J Forensic Med Toxicol 2015; 16(2): 09728074. Available from: http://anilaggrawal.com/ij/vol_016_no_002/papers/paper001.html. [accessed: 2020 June 4].
Rissech C, Garcia M, Malgosa. Sex and age diagnosis by ischium morphometric analysis. Forensic Sci Int 2003; 135(3): 188‒96.
Patriquin ML, Steyn M, Loth SR. Metric analysis of sex differ-ences in South African black and white pelves. Forensic Sci Int 2005; 147(2‒3): 119‒27.
Adams BJ, Byrd JE. Interobserver variation of selected post-cranial skeletal measurements. J Forensic Sci 2002; 47(6): 1193‒202.
Bhaskar BR, Doshi MA. Sex determination from adult human humerus by discriminant function analysis. IJRMS 2017; 5(9): 3891‒7.
Cho HJ, Kwak DS, Kim IB. Morphometric Evaluation of Kore-an Femurs by Geometric Computation: Comparisons of the Sex and the Population. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 730538.
Frutos LR. Determination of sex from the clavicle and scapula in a Guatemalan contemporary rural indigenous population. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 2002; 23(3): 284‒8.
Falsetti AB. Sex assessment from metacarpals of human hand. J Forensic Sci 1995; 40(5): 774‒6.
Biswas A, Bhattacharya S. A morphometric and radiological study of the distal end of femur in West Bengal population. IJAE 2017; 122(1): 39‒48.
Kazuhiro S. Sexual determination of long bones in recent Japa-nese. Anthropol Sci 2004; 112(1): 75‒81.
Shah DS, Ghyar R, Ravi B, Hegde CH, Shetty V. Morphological measurements of knee joints in Indian population: comparison to current knee prostheses. Open J Rheumatol Autoim Dis 2014; 4(2): 75.
Murshed KA, Cicekcibasi EA, Karabacakočlu A, Sekar M, Zivlan T. Distal femur morphometry: a gender and bilateral compara-tive study using magnetic resonance imaging. Surg Radiol Anat 2005; 27(2): 108‒12.
Hishmat AM, Michiue T, Sooava N, Orlani S, Ishikawa IA, Fawzu IA, et al. Virtual CT morphometry of lower limb long bones for estimation of the sex stature using postmortem Japanese adult data in forensic identification. Int J Legal Med 2015; 129(5): 1173‒82.
Hussain F, Abdul Kadir MR, Zulkifly AH, Sa'at A, Aziz AA, Hossain G, et al. Anthropometric measurements of the human distal femur: A study of the adult Malay population. Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013: 175056.
Yue B, Varadarajan K, Ai S, Tang T, Rubash H, Li G. Differ-ences of knee anthropometry between Chinese and white men and women. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26(1): 124‒30.
Guhan O, Harrison K, Kris A. A new computer-tomography-based method of sex estimation: Development of Turkish population-specific standards. Forensic Sci Int 2015; 255: 2‒8.
Cho HJ, Kwak DS, Kim IB. Morphometric evaluation of Kore-an femurs by geometric computation: comparisons of the sex and the population. Biomed Res Int 2015; 2015: 730538.
Kranioti EF, Apostol MA. Sexual dimorphism of the tibia con-temporary Greeks, Italians and Spanish: forensic implications. Int J Legal Med 2015; 129(2): 357‒63.