Advertisement

Anatomical Science International

, Volume 91, Issue 3, pp 246–249 | Cite as

Morphometric characteristics of caudal cranial nerves at petroclival region in fetuses

  • Omer OzdogmusEmail author
  • Enis Saban
  • Mazhar Ozkan
  • Sercan Dogukan Yildiz
  • Ural Verimli
  • Ozgur Cakmak
  • Yasin Arifoglu
  • Umit Sehirli
Original Article
  • 193 Downloads

Abstract

Morphometric measurements of cranial nerves in posterior cranial fossa of fetus cadavers were carried out in an attempt to identify any asymmetry in their openings into the cranium. Twenty-two fetus cadavers (8 females, 14 males) with gestational age ranging between 22 and 38 weeks (mean 30 weeks) were included in this study. The calvaria were removed, the brains were lifted, and the cranial nerves were identified. The distance of each cranial nerve opening to midline and the distances between different cranial nerve openings were measured on the left and right side and compared. The mean clivus length and width were 21.2 ± 4.4 and 13.2 ± 1.5 mm, respectively. The distance of the twelfth cranial nerve opening from midline was shorter on the right side when compared with the left side (6.6 ± 1.1 versus 7.1 ± 0.8 mm, p = 0.038). Openings of other cranial nerves did not show such asymmetry with regard to their distance from midline, and the distances between different cranial nerves were similar on the left and right side. Cranial nerves at petroclival region seem to show minimal asymmetry in fetuses.

Keywords

Caudal cranial nerves Clivus Fetus Morphometry Petroclival region 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bulsara KR, Asaoka K, Aliabadi H, Kanaly C, Friedman A, Fukushima T (2008) Morphometric three-dimensional computed tomography anatomy of the hypoglossal canal. Neurosurg Rev 31:299–302CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Gurdal E, Cakmak YO, Ozdogmus O et al (2007) Morphometric measurements of the caudal cranial nerves in the petroclival region. Zentralbl Neurochir 68:47–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Krmpotic-Nemanic J, Vinter I, Kelovizc Z, Marusic A (2005) Postnatal changes of the clivus. Ann Anat 187:277–280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Lang J (1985) Anatomy of the brainstem and the lower cranial nerves, vessels, and surrounding structures. Am J Otol Suppl:1–19Google Scholar
  5. Lang J (ed) (1995) Skull base and related structures: atlas of clinical anatomy. Schattauer GmbH, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  6. Pieper DR, LaRouere M, Jackson IT (2002) Operative management of skull base malignancies: choosing the appropriate approach. Neurosurg Focus 12:e6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Sejrsen B, Jakobsen J, Skovgaard LT, Kjaer I (1997) Growth in the external cranial base evaluated on human dry skulls, using nerve canal openings as references. Acta Odontol Scand 55:356–364CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Shah SM, Joshi MR (1978) An assessment of asymmetry in the normal craniofacial complex. Angle Orthod 48:141–148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Surchev N (2008) Arterial relationships to the nerves and some rigid structures in the posterior cranial fossa. Clin Anat 21:492–500CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Wanifuchi H, Loveren HR, Keller JT, Bouthilier A, Park K, Tew JM (2001) Microanatomy of the clivus: dural architecture and venous pathway. Shimane J Med Sci 19:17–23Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Association of Anatomists 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Omer Ozdogmus
    • 1
    Email author
  • Enis Saban
    • 1
  • Mazhar Ozkan
    • 1
  • Sercan Dogukan Yildiz
    • 1
  • Ural Verimli
    • 1
  • Ozgur Cakmak
    • 2
  • Yasin Arifoglu
    • 3
  • Umit Sehirli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnatomyMarmara University School of MedicineIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of AnatomyKoc University School of MedicineIstanbulTurkey
  3. 3.Department of AnatomyBezm-i Alem University School of MedicineIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations