Universidad Nacional De San Antonio Abad Del Cusco
Universidad Nacional De San Antonio Abad Del Cusco, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud. Cusco, Perú.
Universidad Nacional Jorge Basadre Grohmann, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud. Tacna, Perú
Universidad Continental, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud. Huancayo, Perú.
Introduction: The identification of postmortem persons using dental comparison is very useful in the case of finding bodies in an advanced state of decomposition for various reasons, and this is where dentistry plays a significant role, since it has the possibility of providing ante mortem data on the deceased for comparison and definitive identification.
Objective: The general objective was to know the possibilities and limitations of odontological comparison in the identification of postmortem persons.
Methods: A systematic review of the literature was carried out in the Scopus, Pubmed and Google Scholar databases, in the period 2018 to 2023, where 210 articles were totaled, with a final selection of 20.
Results: In relation to the number of publications, Europe and Asia led in this category. The type of study that stands out is the case report of observational studies with comparative analysis, and the systematic review. As aspects addressed most frequently are, the role of the forensic odontologist, 3D scanning, microcomputed tomography, cone beam computed tomography and the importance of ante mortem and postmortem dental records in the identification of postmortem persons, by means of dental comparison.
Conclusions: The possibilities and limitations of odontological or dental comparison will depend directly on the full, safe and reliable accessibility of the ante mortem and postmortem information
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.