ACCURACY OF FOUR DENTAL AGE ESTIMATION METHODOLOGIES IN CROATIAN CHILDREN

Cilj: Usporediti točnost četiri metode za određivanje dentalne dobi u djece analizirajući mineralizaciju trajnih zubi metodama prema Cameriere i sur. (2006) (CAM), Liliequist i Lundberg (LLH) i dvije metode prema Nolli, NOL7- bez trećih kutnjaka i NOL8- s trećim kutnjacima, na uzorku djece u Hrvatskoj. Metode: analizirani su ortopantomogrami 924 djeteta (365 dječaka i 559 djevojčica), u dobi između 8 i 14,99 godina te je pomoću metoda CAM, LLH, NOL7 i NOL8 izvršena procjena njihove dentalne dobi. Rezultati: Metodom LLH su se dobile najbolje apsolutne vrijednosti razlika dentalne od kronološke dobi, bez obzira na spol, dok je CAM metoda imala najlošije rezultate. Kada je uzorak stratificiran samo prema spolu, najbolje apsolutne vrijednosti su postignute s LLH metodom (0,98 godina). Međutim, kada je uzorak stratificiran prema spolu i dobi, tada je CAM metoda pokazala visoku razinu preciznosti na ortopantomogramima u ranoj dobi, dok je LLH metoda pokazala veću preciznost u starijoj dobi. Rezultati dobiveni metodama NOL7 i NOL8 su uglavnom bili vrlo slični, iako je NOL7 metoda dala nešto bolje rezultate. Zaključak: Najbolji način za procjenu dobi djece u Hrvatskoj je korištenje LLH metode, zatim NOL7 i NOL8 i na kraju CAM metode.Objectives: To analyse the accuracy of four age estimation methods using the mineralisation of the permanent teeth. We compared methods by Cameriere et al. (2006) (CAM), Liliequist and Lundberg (LLH), Nolla method without third molars (NOL7), Nolla method with third molars (NOL8) in a sample of children from Croatia. Methods: Orthopantomograms of 924 children (365 males and 559 females) aged between 8 and 14,99 years were analysed using the CAM, LLH, NOL7 and NOL8 age estimation methodologies. Results: LLH presented the best absolute values between the difference of dental and chronological age, regardingless sex stratification, while CAM presented the worst results. When the sample was stratified only by sex, the best absolute values were achieved with LLH (0,98 years). On the other hand, when the sample was stratified by sex and age, CAM presented high level of accuracy in orthopantomograms at the early ages, while the LLH method presented higher accuracy at the older ages. The results obtained with the Nolla methods (NOL7 and NOL8) were mostly similar, but NOL7 yielded slightly better results. Conclusions: The best method for evaluating dental age in Croatian children was LLH, followed by NOL7, NOL8 and CAM