Performance of different dental age estimation methods on Saudi children.

aimTo evaluate and compare the performance of six dental age estimation methods (Moorrees, Fanning and Hunt, Demirjian, Gleiser and Hunt, Nolla, Chaillet et al., and Nicodemo et al.) on a sample of Saudi children.

methodThis cross-sectional study was based on the evaluation of a sample of 400 archived digital panoramic radiographs of healthy Saudi children (200 each from boys and girls) aged 6 to 15.99 years. Panoramic radiographs acquired during 2018-2021 were obtained from the information technology department of the dental clinics at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Dental age was evaluated using the six dental age estimation methods on the developing permanent dentition in both jaws of the left side. The accuracy of each method was assessed in relation to chronological age, and a comparison between these methods was made.

resultFor all the tested methods, significant differences were found between chronological and dental age (P<0.001). The mean difference between dental and chronological age was (-2.19 years) for Chaillet et al. method, (0.15 years) for the Demirjian method, (-1.01 years) for the Moorrees, Fanning and Hunt method, (-1.72 years) for Nicodemo et al. method, (-1.29 years) for Nolla method, and (-1.00 years) for Gleiser and Hunt method.

conclusionAmong the tested methods, the accuracy in Saudi subjects was the highest for Demirjian's method, followed by the Moorrees, Fanning and Hunt method. The methods proposed by Nicodemo et al., and Chaillet et al., were the least accurate.