Printer Friendly

Dermatoglyphic study: a comparison in hands of type II diabetes mellitus patients and normal persons of Udaipur region.

INTRODUCTION: Dermatoglyphics is a scientific method of reading lines and ridges of finger, palm and sole. The term dermatoglyphics was first introduced in 1926 by Cummin and Midlo, though Bid low was first to give descriptions of ridges in detail in 17th century. The precise patterns and minutiae are determined at a very early embryonic period that is about 10 weeks, well developed by 16th week and complete by 24th week of gestation.

Since many genes take part in the formation of dermatoglyphic characters, it is possible that genes which predispose to familial disease may, by pleiotropic, also influence the ridge pattern so that particular constellation of dermatoglyphic features may be characteristic of a particular disease. (1) Abnormal dermatoglyphic patterns have been observed in several non- chromosomal genetic disorders and other diseases whose aetiology may be influenced directly or indirectly, by genetic inheritance. (2,3)

Various dermatoglyphic studies of patients suffering from different congenital disorders and disease such as diabetes, Leukemia, Leprosy, Bronchial asthma and various cancers etc. have been conducted, completed and contrasted. A significant link has been found between dermatoglyphic pattern and the disease. Type 2 Diabetes is currently thought to occur in genetically predisposed individuals who are exposed to a series of environmental influences that precipitates the onset of disease. (4) It is unanimously recognized that diabetes generally and Type-2 diabetes especially, represents a major threat to the public health worldwide.

In 2030 it is estimated that the total number of diabetes affected people will reach 366 million. An epidemic of diabetes is underway in both the underdeveloped and developing countries. It is estimated that in about up to 50% of affected people the disease is undiagnosed. Subjects with undiagnosed Type 2 diabetes are at increased risk of developing coronary artery disease, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease.

Therefore it is important to screen for diabetes in a cost effective manner in subjects who demonstrate major risk factors for diabetes.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Considering all the above factors and also the well-known relation of dermatoglyphics with the malady, the present study is undertaken to study these morphological characteristics, on group of patients suffering from Type II Diabetes mellitus, all coming from Udaipur Region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The material for study consisted of finger and palm prints of patients selected from those attending outpatient department of Endocrinology of M.B. Govt. Hospital. Patients were prediagnosed to be of Type II Diabetes mellitus. The finger and palm prints of normal individuals were also taken for the study. The study was conducted for a period of 2 years. 50 male and 50 Female patients in the age group of 40-50 years with Type-2 Diabetes of Udaipur region and without other disease e.g. hypertension, cataract, asthma, cancer, congenital anomalies and as far as possible any other diseases which may influence dermatoglyphic changes.

It is a case control study. Sample size was calculated on the basis of previous studies. Controls were males and females from same region to avoid any regional variation, of the corresponding age as the patients and with normal range of fasting plasma glucose level. Cummins ink method (5) with Black Duplicating Ink (Kores) was used for present study. Clearance for the study was taken from Ethical committee. Consent of the patients and the controls was taken before the study. Student t test and chisquare test were used for the study.

METHODS: (Fig. 1) The hands are washed with soap and water. The humidity is removed with ether, which also removes the greasy material. A small dab of ink is placed on the inking slab and spread with roller into thin even film. Palm is carefully and uniformly spread with inked roller to cover the whole area of palm to be printed for examination. The paper is set over the round bottle and moderately open fingers and palm of hand are successively rolled over with some pressure on it permitting the bottle and paper to move forward, so that whole of the palm and plain or dab finger prints are properly obtained. Plain prints are recorded without rotation of digits by contact of ball of finger. The rolled prints are taken by rotation of finger, both in inking and printing, in order to obtain complete impression of fingertip (ball).

The paper is laid, edges to edges, upon rigid plain surface of smooth table top or glass sheet. Inking is completed by placing the edge down on the ink film and rolled till the opposite margin comes in contact with surface of inking slab. This smears fingers from its end to a level just proximal to distal interphalangeal joint crease. Next the finger is pressed, edge down against paper margin and rolled to opposite edge in a manner similar to that in inking. The knowledge of anatomical adaptation to rotation of hand arm is applied to minimize certain awkward manipulations.

Thus thumb has to be placed with ulnar edge downward and rolled toward body and other digits are placed with radial edge downward rolled away from body. This method enables us to record the complete imprints including palmar surfaces of all five digits in one attempt. These prints are studied with the help of a magnifying lens for observation under different heads. Other accessory items required are scale, pointed HB-pencil, mercury lamp, biological pointed indispensable needle, a protractor and observation chart or Performa

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

OBSERVATIONS: The observations have been recorded in the present study for quantitative and qualitative dermatoglyphic feature from hand prints of 100 control (50 male and 50 female) and 100 diabetic patients of type II diabetes mellitus (50 male and 50 female) attending Endocrinology Department of M.B. Govt. Hospital' Udaipur. (Rajasthan)

Observations were compared between controls and diabetics. Observations were tabulated as under: (FIG 2)

1. Distribution of fingertip patterns in males. 2. Distribution of fingertip patterns in females. 3. Range distribution of TFRC and mean value of TFRC in males. 4. Range distribution of AFRC and mean value of TFRC in males. 5. Range distribution of AFRC and mean value of TFRC in females. 6. C line patterns. 7. Deviation of t. 8. Presence of t' and t".

RESULTS:

1) FINGER TIP PATTERNS (FIG 3): Whorl, Loop and Arch pattern. Various patterns and their frequency are as follows in patients and normal persons. In Males (Table 1) in both hands combined, whorls, ulnar loops, radial loops and arches are seen in 49.8%, 46.2%, 0.4% and 3.6% diabetics respectively and in 39%, 53%, 2% and 6% controls. P value is < 0.05 and is significant.

In Females (Table 2) in both hands combined whorls, ulnar loops, radial loops and arches are seen in 46%, 50%, 1.2% and 4.8% diabetics respectively and in 35.6%, 56.8%, 2.8% and 4.8% controls. P value is > 0.05 and is not significant.

2) Total Finger Ridge Counting (TFRC) and Absolute Finger Ridge Counting (AFRC): Method of ridge counting (FIG 3). Ridge count of each fingertip pattern is done separately. Ridge counts are made.

a. From triradial point to point of core b. Along a 1-cm line placed at right angles to ridges, for an indirect measurement of ridge breadth.

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

Total Finger Ridge Count (TFRC): TFRC represents the sum of the ridge count of all the fingers. Larger count is used in those fingers with more than one ridge count. In loops where there is only one triradii; there is one ridge count. In a whorl where there are two triradii there are two ridge counts and here the higher count is used. In a double loop whorl, the counting is done from the triradii to the core that is nearer the triradii.

Absolute Finger Ridge Count (AFRC): It is the sum of the ridge count of all fingers. The TFRC and AFRC are the same if no whorls are present. TFRC expresses the size of the pattern and AFRC reflects the pattern size as well as its intensity.

Mean TFRC (Table 3) of both groups of diabetics is increased (85.58 in males and 84.96 in females) as compared to controls (74.84 in males and 73.40 in females) of respective group and this is statistically significant.

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

Mean AFRC (Table 4) is raised in both groups of diabetics (99.82 in males and 97.38 in females) as compared to controls of respective group (88.54 in males and 87.5 in females) and this is statistically significant in female group

3) Measurement of the angles of the palm atd, tda and tad angle: (Table 5,6,7) (Fig-4) Mean atd (Table 5) angle in diabetics of both groups is significantly higher (42.53 in males and 43.68 in females) as compared to controls of respective groups (40.84 in males and 40.38 in females). Mean tda angle (Table 6) is significantly decreased in diabetics of both groups (79.72 in males and 78.10 in females) as compared to controls (82.02 in males and 82.28 in females).

[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]

Mean tad (Table 7) angle is raised in diabetics (58.68 in male and 59.04 in females) as compared to controls (56.04 in males and 57.28 in females) this is statistically significant only in right hand of males.

4) Percentage frequency of axial triradii (Fig-5): t' or t" pattern (Table 8, 9) is observed in higher frequency in diabetics [(in males 12% have t' & 3% have t") (in females 19% have t' & 2% have t"] as compared to controls of respective group (8% males and 5% females) have t' and none of the control has t".

5) Deviation of axial triradii (t) (Table 10, 11): This was determined by drawing a vertical line drawn from the middle of proximal metacarpophalangeal joint crease of ring finger to distal wrist crease. The axial triradius which falls in the same alignment or on either side of the drawn line is named as central or deviated to ulnar or radial side. Deviation of axial triradii (t) (Table 10, Table 11) is radial in diabetic patients of both the group as compared to controls where position of 't is central. Statistical significance of this observation is also noticed.

6) C main line pattern: C main line pattern (Table 12,13) is observed for absence, proximal, radial and ulnar pattern. Radial C line is the dominant pattern found in diabetics of both groups (46% males and 42% females) as compared to 10% and 16% controls of respective group. Absent C line is the dominant pattern in controls (74% in males and 76% females) as compared to 38% diabetics of each group. This observation is highly significant for both the groups

DISCUSSION:

(1) Finger Tip Patterns-In the present study on I and V digit no difference in pattern frequency is noticed in the patients of either group as compared to control of respective group. Whorls are raised and Loops are decreased in patients of either group to a significant value on II, III and IV digit. Total distribution of patterns on right and left hands of both groups of patients shows an increase in whorl pattern and decrease in loop pattern with a statistical significance only in male diabetics. This observation is well consistent with findings of Sant et al (1983), 6 Barta et al (1978) (7) and Banerjee et al (1985) (8), Rakate et al (2013) (9) who have also observed an increase in whorl pattern in hands of male diabetics but an opposite trend was noticed by Ravindranath and Thomas (1995) (10) who had reported an increase in loop pattern and decrease in whorl pattern in diabetic patients.

(2) Mean TFRC value is significantly raised on individual right and left hand and both hands combined in diabetic group of both sexes as compared to controls of the respective group. This is well consistent with findings of Sant et al (1983), (6) Banerjee et al (1985), (8) Barta et al (1978) (7) and Panda et al (2004). (11) Ravindranath and Thomas (1995) (10) however have reported a decrease in TFRC in diabetic group. Rajanigandha Pai et al (2006)12 have observed no statistical difference in TFRC of controls and cases.

(3) Mean AFRC value on individual right and left hand and both hands combined (Right + Left) is raised in diabetic group as compared to controls of the respective group. Right hand and both hands combined show a statistical significance in female group. Panda et al (2004) (11) have also reported an increase in AFRC of diabetic patients while Ravindranath and Thomas (1995) (10) have reported a decrease in AFRC of diabetic patients. Rajni Gandha Pai (12) et al (2006) have not observed any statistical difference in AFRC of diabetic patients.

(4) ATD angle on individual right and left hand and both hands combined is higher in diabetic group of both sexes in the present study. This is well consistent with findings of Rajni Gandha Pai et al (12) (2006) who have reported raised atd angle in non-insulin dependent diabetic patients but this does not correlate with study of Shubha et al (13) (2009) who have observed a decrease in angle atd in diabetic patients. Mittal et al (14) have also observed an increase in atd angle in Diabetic patients.

Mean tad angle on individual right and left hand and both hands combined is increased in diabetic group of both sexes but a statistical significance is observed only in right hand of male diabetics. Mean tda angle on individual right and left hand and both hands combined is decreased in diabetic group of both sexes. This does not correlate with study of Shubha et al (2009) (13) who have observed an increase in ADT angle in diabetic patients. This finding is quiet consistent with findings of Eshwaraiah and Bali (1977), 15 Rajni Gandha Pai et al (2006) (12), Ziegler et al (1993) (16) and Panda et al (2004) (11). Mittal et al (2013) (14) have also observed an decrease in tda angle in Diabetic patients.

(5) Presence of t' or t" is raised in diabetic group of both sexes as compared to controls of the respective group. Panda et al (2004) 11have emphasized presence of t' or t" as a better parameter helpful in scientific screening of persons more prone to diabetes mellitus.

(6) C line patterns-In the present study C radial is significantly increased in individual hands and both hands combined in both the groups of patients. C ulnar and C proximal have an equal frequency in diabetics. C absent type is decreased in both male and female group of patients. Sant et al (1983) (6) and Eswaraiah and Bali (15) (1977) have also observed a decreased C absent type in males. In male group present study correlates well with study of above mentioned authors but does not correlate with findings of Banerjee et al (8) (1985) who have observed significantly decreased C radial, increased C proximal and no change in C ulnar in diabetics as compared to controls. In female group Banerjee et al (8) (1985) and Sant et al (6) (1983) have reported significant increase in C radial pattern, insignificant increase in C absent variety. These observations are consistent with findings of present study

CONCLUSION: The present study was undertaken to study dermatoglyphics patterns in hands of type II diabetes mellitus and its role in early detection of type II diabetes.

A. Qualitative dermatoglyphic parameters taken into account are finger pattern frequency deviation of t, frequency of axial triradii and C main line pattern.

1. Increase in whorls and decrease in loops is observed on finger tips in hands of diabetic patients of both the groups as compared to controls of respective group. Whorls are increased and loops are decreased significantly on II, III and IV digits in both the groups of patient.

2. Deviation of axial triradii t is radial in both the groups of diabetic patients as compared to controls of respective group where 't' is central in position (P value in both the groups is <0.05 and is significant)

3. C main line pattern is radial in all diabetic patients while C main line is absent in most of the controls (P value in both group < 0.05 which is significant)

B. Quantitative parameters studied are mean TFRC value, mean AFRC value, mean a-b ridge count, mean atd angle, mean tad and mean tda angles.

1. Mean TFRC value is raised significantly in hands of both groups of diabetic patients as compared to controls of respective group.

2. Mean AFRC value is raised in hands of diabetic patients of both the groups as compared to controls of respective group with a statistical significance in female group.

3. Mean atd angle value is raised in both the group of patients as compared to controls of respective group (P value in both the groups < 0.05 and is significant).

4. Mean tad angle is raised in both the groups of diabetic patients in comparison to controls of respective group but statistically it is insignificant except in right hands of males where P Value is <0.05 and is significant.

5. Mean tda angle is decreased in both the groups of diabetic patients in comparison to controls of respective group and this is statistically significant. t' and t" are present in increased frequency in both the groups of diabetic patients in comparison to controls of respective group with a statistical significance in female group. Relevant dermotoglyphic patterns observed in study of Type II diabetic patients may prove to be a useful, simple and economical screening method for early diagnosis of individuals in poor socio economic region with dense population like Udaipur region. Such individuals may be subjected later for further specific elaborative investigation to confirm the diagnosis. There appears to be little disagreement in findings of various workers.

Reason for this variation can be due to a small no of patients taken for the study and improper selection of controls and cases. In the present study a careful selection of controls and cases is done. Controls are free from disease at the time of study. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of controls are in normal range (the current criteria for diagnosis of Diabetes Mellitus [DM] emphasize that FPG is most reliable and convenient test for identifying DM in asymptomatic individual) (FPG-100 mg/dl).Cases are pre-diagnosed to be of Type II diabetes and are not having any other disease which could have influenced the dermatoglyphic pattern. Cases and controls both are from Udaipur region to rule out any regional variation

DOI:10.14260/jemds/2014/3486

REFERENCES:

(1.) Fuller IC. Dermatoglyphics: A Diagnostic Aid. Journal of Medical Genetics. 1973; 10(165).

(2.) Bhanu-Simian Crease in man. Some methodological consideration. Journal of human evolution edition-II 1973: 153-160.

(3.) Schauman and Alter-Dermatoglyphic disorders New York, Springer Verleg. 1st edition, 1976; 2 pp-146-172.

(4.) Fauci B, Kasper, Hauser L, Jameson, Loscalzo. Harrison's Principle of internal medicine. 17th Ed. vol II. 2008. pp 2275-2282.

(5.) Cummins H, Midlo C. Finger Prints Palms and Soles, An Introduction to Dermatoglyphics Dover Publication. INC. New York, 1943.

(6.) Sant SM, Vare AM, Fakhruddin S. Dermatoglyphics in Diabetes Mellitus. J Anat Soc India. 1983; 32(3).

(7.) Barta L, Regoly Merci A, Kammerer L. Dermatoglyphics features in Diabetes Mellitus. Acta Pediat Acad Sci Hung. 1978; 19(1): 31-4.

(8.) Banerjee AR, Banerjee N, Sarkar NC, Pal SC, Gupta M. Dermatoglyphics in Disease Diabetes Mellitus Ind J Phys. Anthrop and Human Genetics. 1985; 11 (293) 165-170.

(9.) Rakate NS, Zambare BR. Comparative study of the dermatoglyphic patterns in type ii diabetes mellitus patients with non-diabetics. Int J Med Res Health Sci. 2013; 2(4): 955-959.

(10.) Ravindranath R, Thomas IM. Finger ridge count and Finger print pattern in Maturity onset Diabetes Mellitus. Indian Journal of Medical Sciences July 1995; 49(7). 153-156.

(11.) Panda M, Chinara PK, Nayak AK. Dermatoglyphics in Diabetes Mellitus. J Anat Soc India. 2004; 53(1) 33-66.

(12.) P Rajnigandha, P Mangala, S Latha, Vasudha. Palmar complex in Non- Insulin Dependent Diabetics Mellitus. Turk J Med Sciences 2006; 36(6): 353-355.

(13.) Shubha S, Jethani SL, Rohtagi RK, Sharma A. Dermatoglyphics in Type II diabetes Mellitus. J Anat Soc India 2009; 58(1) 47-111.

(14.) Mukesh Mittal, BS Lala. Dermatoglyphics: An Economical Tool for Prediction of Diabetes Mellitus. International Journal of Medical and Health Sciences July 2013, Vol-2; Issue-3pp 292-297.

(15.) Eshwaraiah G, Bali RS. Palmar Flexion creases and dermatoglyphics among diabetic patients. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1977; 47(1) 11-3.

(16.) Ziegler AG, Mathies, Zieglmayer G, Baumg HJ, Choprav Standi E. Dermatoglyphics in Type I Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetic Medicine. 1993; 10(8):720-724.

Parveen Ojha [1], Ghanshyam Gupta [2]

AUTHORS:

[1.] Parveen Ojha

[2.] Ghanshyam Gupta

PARTICULARS OF CONTRIBUTORS:

[1.] Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

[2.] Professor, Department of Anatomy, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

NAME ADDRESS EMAIL ID OF CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Dr. Parveen Ojha, Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan.

Email: drparveena@yahoo.com

Date of Submission: 08/09/2014.

Date of Peer Review: 09/09/2014.

Date of Acceptance: 17/09/2014.

Date of Publishing: 24/09/2014.
TABLE 1: IN MALES (Controls=50, Diabetics=50)

FINGER TIP PATTERN:

DIGITS                Whorls             Ulnar Loops
                Control     Diabetics    Control

Total    R      99(39.6%)   129(51.6%)   133(53.2%)
         L      96(38.4%)   120(48%)     132(52.8%)
         R+ L   195(39%)    249(49.8%)   265(53%)

DIGITS          Ulnar Loops     Radial Loops
                Diabetics     Control   Diabetics

Total    R      115(46%)      6(2.4%)   2(0.8%)
         L      116(46.4%)    4(1.6%)   2(0.8%)
         R+ L   231(46.2%)    10(2%)    2(0.4%)

DIGITS                Arches           P Value
                Control    Diabetics

Total    R      12(4.8%)   4(1.6%)     <0.05 (S)
         L      18(7.2%)   12(4.8%)    <0.05 (S)
         R+ L   30(6%)     18(3.6%)    <0.001 (HS)

Table 2: IN FEMALES (Controls=50, Diabetics=50)

DIGITS                  Whorls             Ulnar Loops
                 Control      Diabetics    Control

Total    R       94(37.6%)    116(46.4%)   140(56%)
         L       84(33.6%)    114(45.6%)   144(57.6%)
         R + L   178(35.6%)   230(46%)     284(56.8%)

DIGITS           Ulnar Loops      Radial Loops
                 Diabetics     Control    Diabetics

Total    R       126(50.4%)    6(2.4%)    2(0.8%)
         L       124(49.6%)    8(3.2%)    4(1.6%)
         R + L   250(50%)      14(2.8%)   6(1.2%)

DIGITS                 Arches           P Value
                 Control    Diabetics

Total    R       10(4%)     6(2.4%)     >0.05
         L       14(5.6%)   8(3.2%)     >0.05
         R + L   24(4.8%)   14(2.8%)    >0.05

Table 3: TOTAL FINGER RIDGE COUNT (TFRC)

            MALES
            Control                Diabetics              P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)    (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          70.10 [+ or -] 22.74   81.06 [+ or -] 36.03   <0.001 (S)
Left        77.28 [+ or -] 21.63   89.42 [+ or -] 18.72   <0.001 (S)
Rt + Left   74.84 [+ or -] 22.20   85.58 [+ or -] 17.08   <0.05 (S)

            FEMALES
            Control                Diabetics              P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)    (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          69.78 [+ or -] 24.92   80.48 [+ or -] 22.33   < 0.01 (S)
Left        76.27 [+ or -] 25.47   88.24 [+ or -] 23.98   < 0.05 (S)
Rt + Left   73.40 [+ or -] 25.13   84.96 [+ or -] 22.88   < 0.05 (S)

Table 4: Mean AFRC

                              MALE
            Control                Diabetics               P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)    (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          89.28 [+ or -] 44.78   100.14 [+ or -] 45.58   >0.05 (NS)
Left        87.23 [+ or -] 43.54   99.22 [+ or -] 42.24    >0.05 (NS)
Rt + Left   88.54 [+ or -] 43.64   99.82 [+ or -] 42.58    >0.05 (NS)

                              FEMALE
            Control                Diabetics               P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)    (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          82.31 [+ or -] 13.28   93.71 [+ or -] 26.56    <0.05 (S)
Left        92.68 [+ or -] 29.34   101.08 [+ or -] 28.47   >0.05 (NS)
Rt + Left   87.5 [+ or -] 31.10    97.38 [+ or -] 27.24    < 0.05 (S)

Table 5: ATD ANGLE

                             MALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          42.57 [+ or -] 4.71   41.82 [+ or -] 5.39   > 0.05 (NS)
Left        39.11 [+ or -] 4.54   39.15 [+ or -] 5.54   > 0.05 (NS)
Rt + Left   40.84 [+ or -] 4.57   42.53 [+ or -] 5.68   < 0.05 (S)

                             FEMALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          42.28 [+ or -] 4.31   42.58 [+ or -] 5.56   > 0.05 (NS)
Left        38.19 [+ or -] 4.19   44.78 [+ or -] 5.54   < 0.001 (HS)
Rt + Left   40.38 [+ or -] 4.27   43.68 [+ or -] 5.45   < 0.05 (S)

TABLE 6: TDA ANGLE

                              MALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          84.08 [+ or -] 6.23   79.48 [+ or -] 6.14   < 0.01 (S)
Left        83.08[+ or -] 6.54    79.96+6.14            < 0.05 (S)
Rt + left   82.02 [+ or -] 6.19   79.72[+ or -] 5.94    < 0.05 (S)

                             FEMALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          82.44 [+ or -] 4.18   78.32 [+ or -] 8.32   < 0.01 (S)
Left        82.12 [+ or -] 4.20   77.88 [+ or -]8.42    < 0.01 (S)
Rt + left   82.28 [+ or -] 4.15   78.10 [+ or -] 8.40   < 0.01 (S)

TABLE 7: TAD ANGLE

                              MALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          55.24 [+ or -] 7.14   59.38 [+ or -] 6.68   > 0.05 (S)
Left        56.85 [+ or -] 6.87   58.08 [+ or -] 6.45   < 0.05 (NS)
Rt + Left   56.04 [+ or -] 6.97   58.68 [+ or -] 6.52   < 0.05 (NS)

                             FEMALE
            Control               Diabetics             P Value
            (Mean [+ or -] S.D)   (Mean [+ or -] S.D)

Rt          58.71 [+ or -] 5.14   60.13 [+ or -] 6.49   > 0.05 (NS)
Left        55.85 [+ or -] 5.10   57.95 [+ or -] 6.63   > 0.05 (NS)
Rt + Left   57.28 [+ or -] 5.11   59.04 [+ or -] 6.58   > 0.05 (NS)

TABLE 8: Presence of t, t', t' MALES

Control=50            Control=50
Diabetic=50   Right      Left       Total

t             47 (94%)   45 (90%)   92 (92%)
t'            3 (6%)     5 (10%)    8 (8%)
t"            --         --         --

Control=50            Diabetic=50
Diabetic=50   Right      Left       Total

t             41 (82%)   44 (88%)   85 (85%)
t'            7 (14%)    5 (10%)    12 (12%)
t"            2 (4%)     1 (2%)     3 (3%)

TABLE 9: IN FEMALES

Control=50             Control=50
Diabetic=50   Right      Left       Total

T             48 (96%)   47 (94%)   95 (95%)
t'            2 (4%)     3 (6%)     5 (5%)
t"            --         --         --

Control=50             Diabetic=50
Diabetic=50   Right      Left       Total

T             40 (80%)   39 (78%)   79 (79%)
t'            8 (16%)    11 (22%)   19 (19%)
t"            2 (4%)     --         2 (2%)

TABLE 10: DEVIATION OF t IN MALES

Control=50           Radial              Ulnar
Diabetic=50    Control   Cases     Control   Cases

Right          22(44%)   22(44%)   2(4%)     20(40%)
Left           4(8%)     26(52%)   4(8%)     20(40%)
Right + Left   26(26%)   48(48%)   6(6%)     40(40%)

Control=50          Central        P Value
Diabetic=50    Control   Cases

Right          26(52%)   8(16%)    <0.001 (HS)
Left           42(84%)   4(8%)     <0.001 (HS)
Right + Left   68(68%)   12(12%)   <0.001 (HS)

TABLE 11: DEVIATION OF t IN FEMALES

Control=50           Radial              Ulnar
Diabetic=50    Control   Cases     Control   Cases

Right          20(40%)   23(46%)   2(4%)     16(32%)
Left           14(28%)   27(54%)   8(16%)    4(8%)
Right + Left   34(34%)   50(50%)   10(10%)   20(20%)

Control=50          Central        P Value
Diabetic=50    Control   Cases

Right          28(56%)   11(22%)   <0.001 (HS)
Left           28(56%)   19(38%)   <0.05 (S)
Right + Left   56(56%)   30(30%)   <0.001 (HS)

TABLE 12: C-LINE PATTERN IN MALES

Control=50           Absent            Proximal        Radial
Diabetic=50    Control   Cases     Control   Cases     Control

Right          36(72%)   22(44%)   2(4%)     4(8%)     6(12%)
Left           38(76%)   16(32%)   6(12%)    6(12%)    4(8%)
Right + Left   74(74%)   38(38%)   8(8%)     10(10%)   10(10%)

Control=50     Radial          Ulnar       P Value
Diabetic=50    Cases     Control   Cases

Right          20(40%)   6(12%)    4(8%)   <0.01(HS)
Left           26(52%)   2(4%)     2(4%)   <0.001(HS)
Right + Left   46(46%)   8(8%)     6(6%)   <0.001(HS)

TABLE 13: C-LINE PATTERN IN FEMALE

Control=50          Absent            Proximal      Radial
Diabetic=50   Control   Cases     Control   Cases   Control

Right         36(72%)   20(40%)   2(4%)     4(8%)   10(20%)
Left          40(80%)   18(36%)   2(4%)     4(8%)   6(12%)
Right +Left   76(76%)   38(38%)   4(4%)     8(8%)   16(16%)

Control=50    Radial          Ulnar         P Value
Diabetic=50   Cases     Control   Cases

Right         20(40%)   2(4%)     6(12%)    <0.05(HS)
Left          22(44%)   2(4%)     6(12%)    <0.001(HS)
Right +Left   42(42%)   4(4%)     12(12%)   <0.001(HS)
COPYRIGHT 2014 Akshantala Enterprises Private Limited
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2014 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Author:Ojha, Parveen; Gupta, Ghanshyam
Publication:Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences
Article Type:Report
Date:Sep 25, 2014
Words:4830
Previous Article:The Acrocallosal syndrome: classical imaging findings: a case report.
Next Article:USG and MRI correlation in the evaluation of meniscal lesions of knee.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters