Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Facial Reconstruction Anatomical Method vs. Tissue Depth Method

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Facial Reconstruction Anatomical Method vs. Tissue Depth Method"— Presentation transcript:

1 Facial Reconstruction Anatomical Method vs. Tissue Depth Method
Rebecca Tokodi

2 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

3 Introduction and Background Anatomical Method
Uses origins and insertions to rebuild each muscle Glands and fatty tissue rebuilt Expertise in biomechanics and anatomy needed Longer process than tissue depth method Same for all ethnic groups

4 Introduction and Background Anatomical Method
Temporalis Muscle Zygomaticus Muscle Masseter Muscle Orbicularis Oris Parotid Gland Buccal Fatty Pad Fat Pad of the Chin

5 Introduction and Background Tissue Depth Method
Uses 21 osteological landmarks -11 bilateral points -10 midline points Soft tissue built up to depth markers - soft tissue includes muscles, skin, fat, and glands Depths given by previous studies -collected by needle probe method or ultrasound

6 Introduction and Background Tissue Depth Method
Depths given for different categories -ethnic background -age -weight Faster than anatomical method Less anatomical training needed

7 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

8 Introduction and Background Anatomical Method
Introduced in 1927 by Mikhail Gerasimov 140 of Gerasimov’s reconstructions were identified and verified Also known as the Russian Method Used in an archeological context -tissue depth of ancient population unknown -museum exhibits

9 Introduction and Background Tissue Depth Method
Introduced in 1895 by W.His Made famous by reconstruction of Johann Sebastian Bach Depths recorded by needle puncture method -24 male cadavers -4 female cadavers Used widely today by law enforcement agencies for identifying the dead

10 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

11 Research Focus A comparison of facial reconstruction methods, anatomical and tissue depth. Factors that influence tissue depth Frequency of use Validity of results

12 Introduction and Background
Question Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

13 Materials Sculpting tools Gauge (in millimeters)
Metal scale (in millimeters) Sculpey III modeling clay Acetone soluble adhesive Vinyl machine eraser strips Ping pong ball High gloss paint Plastic skull replica

14 Methods Determination of sex, race, and age Creating prosthetic eye
Cutting depth markers Placement of depth markers Setting of prosthetic eye Connecting tissue depth markers Developing facial features Photography

15 Methods Determination of sex
Male Female Size Larger Smaller Chin Square Pointed Mandible Larger, stronger Smaller, weaker Forehead Sloping Upright Brow ridge Projecting Smooth EOP Crest or spine like Smooth form

16 Methods Determination of race
Caucasoid Negroid Mongoloid Longer and more narrow nasal opening Widest and shortest nasal opening Nasal opening between Caucasoid and Negroid Flattened face but zygomatic bones slant back Projection of lower face Flattened face with projecting zygomatic bones Broad, flat nasal bridge Short cranial vault

17 Methods Creating prosthetic eye
Diameter 24-25mm Color Hazel Iris 12mm

18 Methods Depth markers Measurement Midline Normal Male (mm) Supraglabella 4.25 Glabella 5.25 Nasion 6.50 End of nasals 3.00 Mid-philtrum 10.00 Upper lip margin 9.75 Lower lip margin 11.00 Chin-lip fold 10.75 Mental eminence 11.25 Beneath chin 7.25

19 Methods Depth markers Measurement Bilateral Normal Male (mm) Frontal eminence 4.25 Supraorbital 8.25 Suborbital 5.75 Inferior malar 13.25 Lateral orbit 10.00 Zygomatic arch 7.25 Supraglenoid 8.50 Gonion 11.50 Supra 2nd molar 19.50 Occlusal line 18.25 Sub 2nd molar 16.00

20 Methods Setting prosthetic eye
Center eye frontally Projecting even with top and bottom of orbit Secured by clay Fatty pad behind eye deteriorates with age

21 Methods Connecting tissue depth markers
Fill in by strips to almost cover depth markers No clay is placed on midline points 3,4,5,6,7, and 8 No clay is placed on bilateral points 13 and 15

22 Methods Developing the mouth
Closed mouth easiest Vertical thickness of mouth is upper CEJ to lower CEJ (cement enamel junction) Width is pre-molar to pre-molar Artistic development of parting line and philtrum

23 Methods Developing the nose
Measurement for width Negroid Nasal aperture + 16mm Caucasoid Nasal aperture + 10mm Mongoloid Nasal aperture + 13mm Nasal aperture measured at widest width

24 Methods Developing the nose
Projection given by: Length of bony spine x’s 3 added to depth of marker 5 Shape of nose determined by shape of nasal aperture

25 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

26 Results Caucasian Adult male Age- undetermined

27 Results 4.1% of children are biracial (U.S. Census 1990)
Ethnicity Population 2003 % Population Caucasian 234,196,357 80.5 African American 37,098,946 12.8 American Indian/ Inuit 2,786,652 1.0 Asian 11,924,912 4.1 Pacific Islander/ Hawaiian 495,335 0.2 Hispanic/ Latino 39,898,889 13.7 Two or more races 4,307,575 1.5 4.1% of children are biracial (U.S. Census 1990) -number expected to increase 2,000,000 multiracial children in married-couple households

28 Results Negroid and mixed population study
Facial tissue for negroids is thicker in the upper and lower parts of the face- Lower lip, frontal eminence, and cheek area Negroid female tissue depths were thicker in the lower lip, mental eminence, frontal eminence, lateral orbital margin, supra glenoid, and cheek area

29 Results Caucasoid and mixed population study
Tissues thickness of the males of the mixed group was greater in the mid philtrum, upper lip, and gonial areas, Tissue thickness of caucasoid males was thicker in the nasion, mental eminence, supra orbital, lateral orbital, and cheek regions

30 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

31 Discussion Negroid males and females have thicker soft tissue compared to the mixed race population The mixed race population had considerable differences compared to the caucasoid populations The mixed race group is unique and measurements should not be considered an average between caucasoid and negroid populations

32 Discussion Argued that reconstruction is not meant to make exact portrait Many variables that can influence the rate of identification Too much of an artistic influence can change results

33 Discussion Increase in biracial individuals means an inability to apply tissue depths to reconstructions Not ethical to use insufficient information Caucasian becoming less defined Easier when clues are left at the scene Facial reproduction still widely used by law enforcement agencies- including FBI

34 Discussion

35 Introduction and Background
Research Focus Materials and Methods Results Discussion Conclusion

36 Conclusion More studies need to be conducted on biracial populations
Anatomical method new method of choice? Other options of facial reproduction -computerized methods

37

38

39

40


Download ppt "Facial Reconstruction Anatomical Method vs. Tissue Depth Method"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google