Journals / Harran Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1

Morphometric Evaluation of Rarely Seen Supratrochlear Foramen and Supracondylar Process in the Humerus in Turkish Population

Türk Populasyonunda Humerus'da Nadir Görülen Foramen supratrochleare ve Processus supracondylaris'in Morfometrik Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
30–37
Publication Date
2022-04-28
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, these variations can be an important indicator in the differentiation of different races.Key Words: Humerus, Supracondylar process, Supratrochlear foramen, Morphometry, Variation

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Abstract Background: Sometimes seen distal to humerus foramen supratrochleare and supracondylar process are rare variations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The supracondylar process is a variant located 1/3 distal side of the humerus.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, these variations can be an important indicator in the differentiation of different races.Key Words: Humerus, Supracondylar process, Supratrochlear foramen, Morphometry, Variation
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Humerus · supracondylar processus · supratrochlear foramen

Abstract

Abstract Background: Sometimes seen distal to humerus foramen supratrochleare and supracondylar process are rare variations. Supracondylar process is a variations observed on the distal side of humerus. The supracondylar process is a variant located 1/3 distal side of the humerus. The supratrochlear foramen may appear between the coronoid fossa and olecra-non fossa. Since the foramen may appear in a semi-transparent form, it may be misdiagnosed as an osteolytic lesion. The aim of the present study was to identify the prevalence and morphology of supratrochlear foramen and the supracondylar process of the humerus inTurkish population . Furthermore, we believe considering these variations by looking at this variation in the previously taken radiological images of the people, help identification of that person in any forensic case.Materials and Methods: The present study was conducted on 460 humerus samples (237 right; 223 left) with unclear age and gender in the Anatomy Laboratories of Necmettin Erbakan Meram, KTO Karatay, Yozgat Bozok, Kayseri Erciyes Faculties of Medicine. Morphometric measurements of such formations on the humerus were performed through a digital calliper and osteometric board. Furthermore, along with supratrochlear typing, the prevalence in the process and humerus was also detected.Results: In the present study, the supracondylar process was detected in 11 (2.4%) individuals (4 right; 7 left); however, it was not detected in 449 (97.6%) humerus samples. The supratrochlear foramen was detected in 63 (13.7%) of 460 humeri. The foramen supratrochlear was seen in 10.8% of the humerus on the right side in 16.5% (29) and in 16.5% of the left humerus. The prevalence of both process and foramen on the humerus was 0.7% (3). The average lengths of right supracondylar process and left supracondylar process were 9.47±1.94 mm and 16.24±14.06 mm, respectively. The verti-cal diameter was 3.45±1.07 mm on the right supratrochlear foramen, and 3.57±1.17 mm on the left supratrochlear foramen; mean transverse diameter of the right foramen was 4.73±2.81 mm, and mean transverse diameter was detect-ed 4.41± 2.49 mm on the left. Conclusions: The prevalence of supratrochlear foramen and the supracondylar process was higher on the left side; howev-er, both are detected on the right side. We believe that the data obtained would be helpful for an orthopaedic surgeon during intramedullary nailing, and for differential diagnosis of some osteolytic lessons for a radiologist. In addition, these variations can be an important indicator in the differentiation of different races.Key Words: Humerus, Supracondylar process, Supratrochlear foramen, Morphometry, Variation

Özet

Amaç: Humerus’un extremitas distalde bulunma ihtimali olan processus supracondylaris ve foramen supratrochlearis varyasyonel durumlardır. Foramen supratrochlearis; fossa coronoid ve fossa olecranon arasında görülebilir. Bazen de foramen yarı saydam olarak görüldüğü için osteolitik bir lezyon olarak tanımlanır ve yanlış teşhise neden olabilir. Bu çalışmanın amacı humerus’taki foramen supratrochlearis ve processus supracondylaris’in Orta Anadoludaki Türk populasyonuna ait prevelansını ve morfolojisini tanımlamaktır. Materyal ve metod: Çalışmamız KTO Karatay, Yozgat Bozok, Kayseri Erciyes Üniveristesi Tıp Fakülteleri ve Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Meram Tıp Fakültesi Anatomi Laboratuvar’ında bulunan kemik koleksiyonlarındaki yaşı ve cinsiyetti belli olmayan 460 humerus (237 sol, 223 sağ) üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Humerus kemiğindeki bu oluşumların morfometrik ölçümleri digital kumpas ve osteometrik tahta ile gerçekleştirildi. Ayrıca çalışmamızda foramen supratrohlearis’in tiplendirmesi yanı sıra hem foramen hem de processus humerus’da görülme yüzdesi belirlendi. Bulgular: Çalışmamızda processus supracondylaris 11 bireyde %2,4 oranında (sağ 4, sol 7 ) görülürken 446 humerus’da (%97,6) görülmedi. 460 humerus’un 63 tanesinde (%13,7) de foramen supratrochlearis görüldü. Humerus’un %10,8’inde sağ tarafta %16,5 (29), sol humerus’ların ise %16,5’inde foramen supratrochlearis görüldü. Humerus’da hem processus hemde foramen görülme sıklığı % 0,7 (3) olarak belirlenmiştir. Sağ processus supracondylaris uzunluğu ortalama 9,47±1,94 mm, sol tarafta ise ortalama 16,24±14,06 mm olarak belirlenmiştir. Sağ foramen supratrochlearis vertikal çapı ortalama 3,45±1,07 mm, sol taraf çapı ise 3,57±1,17 mm; sağ foramen supratrochlearis tranvers çapı ortalama 4,73±2,81 mm sol taraf çapı ise 4,41± 2,49 mm olarak tespit edildi. Sonuç: Elde edilen verilerin ortopedik cerrahlar için intramedüller çivileme yaparken ve radyolog için o bölgedeki bazı osteolitik lezyonların ayırıcı tanısından yardımcı olacağı kanısındayız ve farklı ırkların önemli bir göstergesi olduğu düşünülebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SAYGIN, D. A., TÜRKOĞLU, F. N., TOKPINAR, A., UÇAR, S., YİLMAZ, S., AYDİN, A., ALPA, S. (2022). Morphometric Evaluation of Rarely Seen Supratrochlear Foramen and Supracondylar Process in the Humerus in Turkish Population. Harran Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 1, 30–37. https://ajindex.com/articles/393832

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Standring S, Ellis H, Healy JC, Johnson D, Williams A. Implantation, placentation, pregnancy and parturition. Gray’s anatomy. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone. 2008;1250-1355
  2. Paraskevas GK, Natsis K, Anastasopoulos N, Ioannidis O, Kitsoulis P. Humeral septal aperture associated with supracondylar process: a case report and review of the literature. Humeral Septal Aperture Associated with Supracondylar Process: a Case Report and Review of the Literature. 2012;135-141
  3. Shivaleela C, Suresh B. S, Kumar GV, Lakshmiprabha S. Morphological study of the supracondylar process of the humerus and its clinical implications. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2014;8(1):1
  4. Bain G, Gupta P, Phadnis J, Singhi PK. Endoscopic excision of supracondylar humeral spur for decompression of the median nerve and brachial artery. Arthroscopy techniques. 2016;5(1):67-70
  5. Tzaveas AP, Dimitriadis AG, Antoniou KI, Pazis IG, Paraskevas GK, Vrettakos AN. Supracondylar process of the humerus: a rare case with compression of the ulnar nerve. Journal of plastic surgery and hand surgery. 2010;44(6):325-326
  6. Das S. Supratrochlear foramen of the humerus. Anatomical science international. 2008;2(83):120-120
  7. Roaf R. Foramen in the humerus caused by the median nerve. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 1957;39(4):748-749
  8. De Wilde V, De Maeseneer M, Lenchik L, Van Roy P, Beeckman P, Osteaux M. Normal osseous variants presenting as cystic or lucent areas on radiography and CT imaging: a pictorial overview. European journal of radiology. 2004;51(1):77-84
  9. Hirsh IS. The supratrochlear foramen: clinical and anthropological considerations. The American Journal of Surgery. 1927;2(5):500-505
  10. Emery KH, Zingula SN, Anton CG, Salisbury SR, Tamai J. Pediatric elbow fractures: a new angle on an old topic. Pediatric radiology. 2016;46(1):61-66
  11. Peeters FLM. Radiological manifestations of the Cornelia de Lange syndrome. Pediatric radiology.1975;3(1):41-46
  12. Akpinar F, Aydinlioglu A, Tosun N, Dogan A, Tuncay I, Ünal Ö. A morphometric study on the humerus for intramedullary fixation. The Tohoku journal of experimental medicine. 2003;199(1):35-42
  13. Kumar RJ, Anaberu P, Shringeri AS, Rakshith A, Hullatti P. Supracondylar Process, an Institutional Experience of a Rare Case Series. Orthop Muscular Syst. 2020;9(278):2161-0533
  14. Thompson JK, Edwards JD. Supracondylar process of the humerus causing brachial artery compression and digi