Advertisement

Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 285–292 | Cite as

Morphometric variability of pyramidalis muscle and its clinical significance

  • Konstantinos Natsis
  • Maria Piagkou
  • Elpida Repousi
  • Stylianos Apostolidis
  • Evangelos Kotsiomitis
  • Konstantinos Apostolou
  • Panajiotis Skandalakis
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The goal of the study is to analyze the morphometric diversity of the pyramidalis muscle (PM) and to evaluate how it is affected by gender and side of occurrence.

Materials and methods

Ninety-six (50 male and 46 female) formalin-embalmed Greek cadavers were dissected.

Results

The PM was present in 93.8 %, usually bilaterally (79.2 %) than unilaterally (14.6 %) (p = 0.003) and more frequently in females (91.3 %) than in males (68 %) (p = 0.0001). Side symmetry was detected. The mean length of PM in males and females was 8.37 ± 2.80 and 6.18 ± 1.64 cm on the right and 7.50 ± 2.66 and 6.56 ± 1.68 cm on the left side. Male predominance existed on the right and left-sided PM lengths (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.054). The mean width of the right-sided PMs in males and females was 1.61 ± 0.55 and 1.50 ± 0.44 cm and the left-sided 1.56 ± 0.53 and 1.55 ± 0.38 cm without gender dimorphism. The positive correlation between the PM length and width indicates a symmetrical muscle augmentation on the two dimensions.

Conclusions

The study demonstrates that the PM is almost constant in Greeks. Among populations the muscle morphometric variability, its clinical significance and its variable uses will help surgeons when intervening in the lower abdominal wall.

Keywords

Pyramidalis muscle Rectus sheath Myocutaneous defects 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Adachi B (1909) Beiträge zur Anatomie der Japaner XII. Die Statistik der Muskelvarietäten. Zeitschr Morphol Anthropol 2:261–312Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anson BJ, Beaton LE, McVay CC (1938) The pyramidalis muscle. Anat Rec 72:405–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashley-Montagu MF (1939) Anthropological significance of the musculus pyramidalis and its variability in man. Am J Physical Anthopol 15:435–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Attinger CE, Ducic I, Cooper P, Zelen CM (2002) The role of intrinsic muscle flaps of the foot for bone coverage in foot and ankle defects in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 110:1047–1057CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beaton LE, Anson BJ (1939) The pyramidalis muscle: its occurrence and size in American whites and Negroes. Am J Phys Anthropol 25:261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chouke KS (1935) The constitution of the sheath of the rectus abdominis muscle. Anat Rec 61:341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chudzinski T (1898) Observations sur les variations musculaires dans les races humaines. Mem Soc Anthrop, Paris XI, pp 1–223Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruveilhier J (1880) Traite d’Anatomie descriptive II, Paris, p 8Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Czeckanowski J (1906) Zur Frage der Correlationen der Muskelvarietaten. Boas Anniv 45:43–54Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dickson MJ (1999) The pyramidalis muscle. J Obstet Gynaecol 19:300CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Didia B, Loveday O, Christian I (2009) Variation and frequency of agenesis of the pyramidalis muscles in Nigerian males. J Exp, Clin Anat 8 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dwight T (1893) Observations on the psoas parvus and pyramidalis. A study on variation. Proc Am Phil Soc 31:117–123Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garvey JF (2012) Computed tomography scan diagnosis of occult groin hernia. Hernia 16:307–314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goss CM (1948) Fasciae and muscles of the abdomen. Gray’s anatomy, 29th edn. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, pp 424–427Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gürbüz-Malcic J, Özdoğmuş O, Yüksel M (2001) Unusual rectus abdominis and pyramidalis muscles: clinical significance—a case report. MMJ 14:107–109Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hinoul P, Roovers JP, Ombelet W et al (2009) Surgical management of urinary stress incontinence in women: a historical and clinical overview. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 145:219–225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jurascheck F, Dollfus P, Chapuis A et al (1987) Surgical treatment of the static perineal modifications in spinal cord or cauda equina lesions. Paraplegia 25:475–481CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jyothilakshmi TK, Sarala HS, Gautham BV (2013) Anatomical significance of the nerve to pyramidalis muscle: a case report. Anatomica Karnataka 7:41–44Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koganei Y, Arai H, Shikinami J (1903) Varietatenstatistik der musculn. Tokyo Igakkai Zasshi 17:127–139 (in Japanese with German abstract) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koulouris G (2008) Imaging review of groin pain in elite athletes: an anatomic approach to imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 191:962–972CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    LeDouble AF (1897) Traité des Variations du Système Musculaire de l’Homme et Leur Signification au Point de vue de l’Anthropologie Zoologique. Libraire C. Reinwald, Scheicher Frères, Paris, pp 583–587Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Loth E (1912) Beiträge zur Anthropologie die Negerweichteile (Muskelsystem), Stuttgart, p 98–99Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lovering RM, Anderson LD (2008) Architecture and fiber type of the pyramidalis muscle. Anat Sci Int 83:294–297CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Monkhouse WS, Khalique A (1986) Variations in the composition of the human rectus sheath: a study of the anterior abdominal wall. J Anat 145:61–66PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nakamura S (1935) Ueber den M. rectus abdominis und den M. pyramidalis der Japaner (am Kynahu). J Kumamoto Med Soc 11:1251–1261Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nakano T (1923) Beiträge zur Anatomie die Chinesen. Die Statistik des Muskelvarietäten. Okajimas’ Folia Anat Jap 1:273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Natsis K, Repousi E, Noussios G et al (2014) The styloid process in a Greek population: an anatomical study with clinical implications. Anat Sci Int 90:67–74Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schwalbe G, Pffitzner W (1889) Variet Statistik und Anthropologie. Anat Anz 4:705–714Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sippo WC, Gomez AC (1987) Nerve-entrapment from lower abdominal surgery. J Fam Pract 25:585–587PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sumino Y, Hirata Y, Hanada M et al (2011) Long-term cryopreservation of pyramidalis muscle specimens as a source of striated muscle stem cells for treatment of post-prostatectomy stress urinary incontinence. Prostate 71:1225–1230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thomson A (1895) Fifth annual report of the committee of collective investigation of the anatomical society of Great Britain and Ireland for the year 1893-94. J Anat Physiol. 35-60Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tokita K (2006) Anatomical significance of the nerve to the pyramidalis muscle: a morphological study. Anat Sci Int 81:210–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vallois HV (1926) Valeur et signification du muscle pyramidal de l’abdomen. Arch Anat Histol Embryol 5:497–525Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Van Landuyt K, Hamdi M, Blondeel Ph et al (2003) The pyramidalis muscle free flap. Br J Plast Surg 56:585–592CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Winslow M (1875) Exposition Anatomique de la Structure du Corps Humain. T. IV, Paris, p 45Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Konstantinos Natsis
    • 1
  • Maria Piagkou
    • 2
  • Elpida Repousi
    • 2
  • Stylianos Apostolidis
    • 1
  • Evangelos Kotsiomitis
    • 2
  • Konstantinos Apostolou
    • 2
  • Panajiotis Skandalakis
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Anatomy, Medical SchoolAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Department of Anatomy, Medical SchoolNational and Kapodistrian University of AthensAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations