Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Print this page Email this page Users Online: 682

 Table of Contents  
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 159-161

A study of effect of end-stage renal disease on fingerprints


1 Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy, DVL at Padmavathi Medical College for Women, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Department of Nephrology, Sri Venkateshwara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh, India
3 University of Florida, Gansvile, Florida, USA

Date of Submission20-Apr-2018
Date of Acceptance20-Aug-2018
Date of Web Publication17-Oct-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Hari Krishna Reddy Mogili
Room No. 4, Block No. 3, Staff Quarters, Sri Venkateshwara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati - 517 507, Andhra Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JDRNTRUHS.JDRNTRUHS_38_18

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: Epidermal ridge patterns on fingers, commonly known as fingerprints are one of the oldest and reliable means for human identification. Their reliability is based on the fundamental premise that these patterns are unique to individuals and persistent, i.e., do not change with time. In our maintenance hemodialysis program, we have observed that some of the patients were experiencing problems due to alteration in the pattern while using fingerprints as a biometric for identification. Therefore, we conducted an observational study to understand the magnitude and changes in patterns of the fingerprint impression in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis.
Objectives: To compare and record loss of fingerprint pattern in patients of Chronic Kidney Disease on maintenance hemodialysis and in controls.
Methods: A case control study was conducted over six months period on 150 patients with Chronic Kidney Disease on dialysis and 150 patients of healthy controls in Sri Venkateshwara Institute of Medical Sciences,Tirupati. The fingerprints were obtained from all the ten fingers and were analyzed using a magnifying lens under good day light for finger print clarity and pattern . Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 17.0 software (SPSS, Chicago, 2, USA), unpaired student T test.
Results: Fingerprints were partially lost in 13.3% and completely lost in 10% of patients with ESRD while it was only 1.3% in control group.

Keywords: Dialysis, end-stage renal disease, fingerprint pattern


How to cite this article:
Indirakshi J, Mogili HK, Ram R, Kumar V S, Koratala A. A study of effect of end-stage renal disease on fingerprints. J NTR Univ Health Sci 2019;8:159-61

How to cite this URL:
Indirakshi J, Mogili HK, Ram R, Kumar V S, Koratala A. A study of effect of end-stage renal disease on fingerprints. J NTR Univ Health Sci [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Nov 13];8:159-61. Available from: http://www.jdrntruhs.org/text.asp?2019/8/3/159/269483




  Introduction Top


Fingerprint proves to be less time-consuming and an easy way of personal identification. In the process of establishment of identity in the government and insurance schemes, biometrics with fingerprinting has become a norm, recently in banking transactions for people who lack literacy from April 2017 onward.[1]

The loss of fingerprints is known in hereditary kidney disorders such as Wilms tumor and adult polycystic kidney disease Type 3; others include acro-renal-ocular syndrome, Potter syndrome, kabuki makeup syndrome, neurofaciodigitorenal syndrome, and syndactyly Type 5.[2]

In our maintenance hemodialysis program, we have observed that some of the patients were experiencing problems due to alteration in the pattern while using fingerprints as a biometric for identification. Therefore, we conducted an observational study to understand the magnitude and changes in patterns of the fingerprint impression in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis.

Keeping this in view, we conducted a cross-sectional study to understand the magnitude and the pattern of change with regard to fingerprint impression in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on maintenance hemodialysis. The study involved 300 individuals comprising 150 patients (n = 150) and equal number of controls (n = 150) during a 6-month period (October 2016–March 2017).


  Materials and Methods Top


In this single Center, cross sectional study, we enrolled a total of 300 subjects, comprising of 150 dialysis patients and equal number of healthy controls during a six-month period (October 2016 to March 2017). The fingerprints were obtained from all the 10 fingers. It was analyzed with magnifying lens under good daylight for fingerprint clarity and pattern.

Fingerprints are classified as intact, partially lost, and completely lost. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 17.0 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA), unpaired Student's t-test – to find out the significance of the difference between cases and controls. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


  Results Top


The demographic, professional, and the fingerprint impression details of patients and controls are tabulated in [Table 1]. Blue-collar jobs comprise farmers, daily-wage laborers, office and attenders; white-collar includes TTD superintendents, government employees, desk jobs, and teachers.
Table 1: Demographic And Clinic Characteristics

Click here to view




Fingerprints were normal in 76.6%, partially lost in 13.3%, and completely lost in 10% of the patients with ERSD. Whereas 98.7% of control population had normal fingerprint pattern, and in only 1.3% there is partially lost fingerprints pattern. Fingerprint patterns are significantly lost in patients with ESRD when compared with controls. P-value in partially lost was <0.009 and <0.001 in completely lost, both statistically significant.


  Discussion Top


Our observations highlight the importance of fingerprint loss with statistical significance in the patients with ESRD. This abnormality was significantly seen in patients with blue-collar jobs in comparison to white collars. The possibilities could be related to old age, anemia, xerosis, or dry skin all of which are secondary to chronic kidney disease (CKD). The unrelated causes include manual laborers, homemakers, occupational hand dermatitis, and associated systemic diseases such as breast carcinoma and scleroderma.

In state insurance dialysis schemes, only biometric identification is used which is not flawless and is prone to noncorrectable errors. Wearing down of the fingerprint has found to be the major reason for difficulty in registering of biometric fingerprint attendance.[3]

Fingerprint pattern is altered in systemic lupus erythematosus, breast carcinoma, patients on chemotherapeutic agents such as capecitabine, hand dermatitis, cold weather, excess sweating, and occupations such as medical professionals, mechanics, guitarist, and violinist. The underlying cause in hand dermatitis is possibly by scaling, wrinkling, and fissuring which are responsible for fingerprint dystrophy or low-quality score impairing the match score.[4]

Capecitabine commonly used for breast and colorectal cancer causes hand–foot syndrome in which fingerprints are lost, and the reason for it still not clear.[5] Anemia causes fingerprint changes by altered capillary circulatory parameters of hands. Aging results in loss of collagen making the skin loose and dry. Fingerprint pattern is varied in breast carcinoma or at risk with more than or equal to 6 whorls.[6]


  Conclusion Top


Our observations highlight the importance of fingerprint loss with statistical significance in patients with ESRD. Factors such as old age, anemia and xerosis of the skin that are prevalent in these patients could have a contributory role by altering the capillary circulatory parameters of hands. This is the first study on fingerprint changes in ESRD, to the best of our knowledge. We believe this serves as a basis for future larger studies evaluating the true prevalence of fingerprint changes in this patient population and determine the causal relationship by adequately controlling the confounding factors.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Available from: http://www.fingerprintsscanner.com>tag>adhar aadharcard-Biometricfingerprintscanner. [Last accessed on 2018 Jul].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Wijerathne BT, Meier RJ, Salgado SS, Agampodi SB. Dermatoglyphics in kidney diseases: A review. Springerplus 2016;5:290.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Rashid AF, Lateef M, Kaur B, Aggarwal OP, Hamid S, Gupta N. Biometric finger print identification is it a reliable tool or not? J Indian Acad Forensic Med 2013;35:109-12.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Lee CK, Chang CC, Johar A, Puwira O, Roshidah B. Fingerprint changes and verification failure among patients with hand dermatitis. JAMA Dermatol 2013;149:295-9.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
van Doorn L, Veelenturf S, Binkhorst L, Bins S, Mathijssen R. Capecitabine and the risk of fingerprint loss. JAMA Oncol 2017;3:122-3.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Seltzer MH, Plato CC, Fox KM. Dermatoglyphics in the identification of women either with or at risk for breast cancer. Am J Med Genet 1990;37:482-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed147    
    Printed7    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded67    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal