Onashko Yu. M.

MORPHOLOGY

Scentific article

This study characterizes the variability of supraorbital (NOO), suborbital (VO) and chin (PBO) openings relative to the craniological points of the facial skull of an adult with sex. The study was performed on 52 skull bone preparations and 60 CT scans of Caucasian males and females. Conventional instruments were used to perform craniometric studies on skull bone preparations. Research on CT images was performed using a virtual anatomical table Anatomage table and DICOM Vidar Dicom Viewer 3.0. We determined: minimum and maximum value; arithmetic mean ( X ), standard deviation (σ), mean error (m).It is established that the average value of the distances from the NOO to the point of observation is more important in men on the right and left(ex: X ± σ = 25.09±6.313 mm; left: X ± σ = 24.65±4.435 mm) than in women (eg: X ± σ = 24.27±4.854 mm; left: X ± σ = 24.09±3.427 mm). The distance from the VOC to the point of observation on the right and left in men(ex: X ± σ = 43.91±3.205 mm; left: X ± σ = 43.66±3.336 mm) also has higher average values than in women (eg: X ± σ = 42.29±2.338 mm; left: X ± σ = 42.78±2.309 mm). It was determined that in men the distance from NOO (NOV) to the point ns on the right is equal to X ± σ = 64.70±5.389 mm; left – X ± σ = 64.51±5.442 mm, in women these figures are slightly lower: on the right the distance from the NOO (NOV) to the point ns is X ± σ = 64.21±5.189 mm; left – X ± σ = 64.20±4.726 mm. When analyzing the average values of distances from VET to the point ns is also characterized by an increase in rates in males on both sides (eg: X ± σ = 32.27±5.048 mm; left: X ± σ = 32.99±7.177 mm) compared to females (eg: X ± σ = 31.15±5.416 mm; left: X ± σ = 31.49±4.926 mm). Similarly, according to our data, the distance from the PBU to the point ns in men on the right and left is more important (eg: X ± σ = 52.60±6.166 mm; left: X ± σ = 52.25±6.559 mm) than in women (eg: X ± σ = 48.12±3.796 mm; left: X ± σ = 48.15±4.037 mm). There is an increase in the values of the distance from the NOO to the frontal-chin point in males (eg: X ± σ = 29.85±3.017 mm; left: X ± σ = 29.43±3.415 mm) and a decrease in females (eg: X ± σ = 27.37±3.568 mm; left: X ± σ = 26.99±3,500 mm). The distance from the VOC to the frontal-chin point in men on the right is X ± σ = 39.40±2.537 mm, in women on the same side X ± σ = 38.32±2.300 mm. But on the left, the average value for males is X ± σ = 39.87±2.913 mm, in women – X ± σ = 38.53±3.570 mm

craniometrics,supraorbital foramen,infraorbital foramen,mental foramen.

1. Nanayakkara D, Peiris R, Mannapperuma N, Vadysinghe A. Morphometric Analysis of the Infraorbital Foramen: The Clinical Relevance. Anatomy Research. 2016;2016:7917343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7917343.
2. Zhang KR, Blandford AD, Hwang CJ, Perry JD. Anatomic Variations of the Infraorbital Foramen in Caucasian Versus African American Skulls. Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2019;35(1):25-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/iop.0000000000001126.
3. Garg RK, Lee KS, Kohn SC, Baskaya MK, Afifi AM. Can Sonography Distinguish a Supraorbital Notch From a Foramen? J Ultrasound Med. 2015 Nov;34(11):2089-91. DOI: 10.7863/ultra.14.12015.
4. Laher AE, Wells M, Motara F, Kramer E, Moolla M, Mahomed Z. Finding the mental foramen. Surg Radiol Anat. 2016 May;38(4):469-76. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-015-1565-x.
5. Barbosa DAF, Mesquita LR, Borges MMC, Mendonça DS, Carvalho FSR, Kurita LM, et al. Mental Foramen and Anterior Loop Anatomic Characteristics: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cross-sectional Imaging Studies. J Endod. 2021 Dec;47(12):1829-1843. DOI: 10.1016/j.joen.2021.08.006.
6. Vovk YuM, Vovk OYu. Indyvidualna anatomichna minlyvist ta yii kliniko-morfolohichne znachennia. Kh.: FOP Brovin O.V; 2019. 57 s. [in Ukrainian].
7. Vovk JuN, Vovk OJu, Ikramov VB, Shmargalev AA, Malahov SS. Prakticheskoe znachenie individual’noj anatomicheskoj izmenchivosti dlja sovremennoj kraniologii. Klіnіchna anatomіja ta operativna hіrurgіja. 2016;15(1):105-109. [in Ukrainian].
8. Perloff MD, Chung JS. Emergency blockade of peripheral nerves for refractory trigeminal neuralgia. Am J Emerg Med. 2018;36(11):2058- 2060.
9. Nardi NM, Alvarado AC, Schaefer TJ. Infraorbital Nerve Block. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022. Available from: https:// pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763056/.
10. Zdilla MJ, Koons AW, Russell ML, Mangus KR, Bliss KN. The Infraorbital Foramen Is Located Midway Between the Nasospinale and Jugale: Considerations for Infraorbital Nerve Block and Maxillofacial Surgery. J Craniofac Surg. 2018 Mar;29(2):523-527. DOI: 10.1097/ SCS.0000000000 004186.
11. Nechaeva NK, Epifanov SA. Nejromonitoring v diagnostike i lechenii travmaticheskih nevropatij vetvej trojnichnogo nerva. SPb.: OOO «Izdatel’stvo FOLIANT»; 2013. 112 s.
12. Hester KM, Rahimi OB, Fry CL, Nation HL. The relative locations of the supraorbital, infraorbital, and mental foramina: A cadaveric study. J Anat. 2021 Oct;239(4):782-787. DOI: 10.1111/joa.13482.
13. Chung MS, Kim HJ, Kang HS, Chung IH. Locational relationship of the supraorbital notch or foramen and infraorbital and mental foramina in Koreans. Acta Anat (Basel). 1995;154(2):162-6. DOI: 10.1159/000147763.
14. Gupta T. Localization of important facial foramina encountered in maxillo-facial surgery. Clin Anat. 2008 Oct;21(7):633-40. DOI: 10.1002/ ca.20688.
15. Bondarchuk SS. Osnovy prakticheskoj biostatistiki. Tomsk: Izdatel’stvo TGPU; 2009. 130 s.
16. Kravchenko NS. Metody obrabotki rezul’tatov izmerenij i ocenki pogreshnostej v uchebnom laboratornom praktikume. Tomsk: Izd-vo Tomskogo politehnicheskogo universiteta; 2011. 88 s.
17. Glantz S. Primer of biostatistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical Pub; 2012. 320 p.

«Bulletin of problems biology and medicine» Issue 4 (167), 2022 year, 307-315 pages, index UDK 611.716.06:572.76-053.8-055.1/.3

10.29254/2077-4214-2022-4-167-307-315