Comparison of Dermatoglyphic Pattern among Cleft and Noncleft Children: A Cross-sectional Study

Individuals with nonsyndromic orofacial clefts have increased asymmetry of fingerprint patterns

Dermatoglyphic patterns on the fingers often differ in syndromes and other conditions with a developmental component, compared to the general population. Previous literature on the relationship between orofacial clefts–the most common craniofacial birth defect in humans–and dermatoglyphics is inconsistent, with some studies reporting altered pattern frequencies and/or increased asymmetry and others failing to find differences. To investigate dermatoglyphics in orofacial clefting, we obtained dermatoglyphic patterns in a large multiethnic cohort of orofacial cleft cases (N = 367), their unaffected family members (N = 836), and controls (N = 299). We categorized fingerprint pattern types from males and females who participated at five sites of the Pittsburgh Orofacial Cleft study (Hungary, United States of America (Pennsylvania, Texas), Spain, and Argentina). We also calculated a pattern dissimilarity score for each individual as a measure of left-right asymmetry. We tested for group differences in the number of arches, ulnar and radial loops, and whorls on each individual’s hands, and in the pattern dissimilarity scores using ANOVA. After taking sex and site differences into account, we did not find any significant pattern count differences between cleft and non-cleft individuals. Notably, we did observe increased pattern dissimilarity in individuals with clefts, compared to both their unaffected relatives and controls. Increased dermatoglyphic pattern dissimilarity in individuals with nonsyndromic orofacial clefts may reflect a generalized developmental instability.

Relationship between Dental Archform and Dermtoglyphics

Aim:

To study the associations of dermatoglyphic pattern and the dental archform among the young adult population.

Materials and Methods:

The sample consisted of 150 randomly selected patients, within the age ranging from 15 to 25 years. The fingerprint patterns of the study subjects were recorded with a rolling impression technique using blue printer ink and the archform was assessed from the cast prepared from the impression of their lower dental arches. The data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis using SPSS software. The fingerprint patterns for each digit were analyzed and correlated with archform using appropriate statistical tests (chi-square test).

Results:

Although no fingerprint pattern was found to be specific for a particular dental archform, increased frequencies of whorls in subjects with square or ovoid archform, high frequencies of ulnar loop pattern with ovoid or tapered archform, and radial loop finger ridge pattern in those with tapered archform were observed.

Conclusion:

Dermatoglyphic analysis can be used as an indicator for determining the dental archform at an early stage, thereby aiding in the orthodontic treatment of malocclusion aiming to establish favorable occlusion and long-term stability.