Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determining Anatomical Position of the Umbilicus in Turkish Population

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The umbilicus is essential to the aesthetic appearance of the abdomen. However, very little has been written about the exact location of the aesthetically pleasing umbilicus as far as the Turkish population is concerned. Although a variety of reconstructive methods are available, no real standards define the location and shape of the umbilicus. This is a single cross-sectional cohort study focused on the morphometric analysis of the umbilicus in 300 adults between 18 and 65 years old. All data, including standardized measures and pictures, were determined. A total of 150 women and 150 men are incorporated into the study who referred to Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University Hospital between January and July 2018. In this study, the authors observed that the umbilicus is situated around the midline plane such that the ratio of the distance between the xiphisternum and the umbilicus and the distance between the pubic symphysis and the umbilicus is 1.45. Also, the ratio of the distance between the umbilicus and anterior superior iliac spine and the between anterior superior iliac spine is approximately 0.6/1. Most umbilicus was found to be oval shape in males while round shape in females. Umbilical hood orientation was with an inferior hood in males while superior–inferior hood in females in my study at Turkish population. The present study was performed to determine the normal anatomical position of the umbilicus and umbilicus shapes in a sample of Turkish people and to obtain ideal ranges for repositioning neo-umbilicus during abdominoplasty.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dubou R, Ousterhout DK (1978) Placement of the umbilicus in an abdominoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 61(2):291–293

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lee SJ, Garg S, Lee HP (2014) Computer-aided analysis of the “beautiful” umbilicus. Aesthet Surg J 34(5):748–756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Danilla S, Bonasic (2007) Anatomical localization of the umbilicus: a statistical analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 119:1123–1124

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Craig S, Faller M, Puckett C (2000) In search of the ideal female umbilicus. Plast Reconstr Surg 105:389–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Joseph W, Sinno S, Brownstone ND, Mirrer J, Thanik V (2016) Creating the perfect umbilicus: a systematic review of recent literature. Aesthet Plast Surg 40:372–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jayyosi L, Boudaoud N, Okiemy O, Correia N, Alanio-Detton E, Bory J et al (2016) Umbilicus in children. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 61(5):713–721

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Correia N, Jayyosi L, Chiriac S, Renard Y, Raimond E, Poli-Merol ML, Chaput B, François C (2018) Morphometric analysis of the umbilicus according to age. Aesthet Surg J 38(6):627–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Abhyankar SV, Rajguru AG, Patil PA (2006) Anatomical localization of the umbilicus: an Indian study. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(4):1153–1157

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dudukovic M, Kisic H, Baez ML, Bulic K, Veir Z, Cvieticanin B et al (2014) Anatomical prediction for surgical positioning of the umbilicus in a white population. Ann Plast Surg 75:135–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Deborah Y, Novicoff WM, Gampper TJ (2016) The average size and position of the umbilicus in young men and women. Ann Plast Surg 76(3):346–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rodriguez-Feliz JR, Makhijani S, Przybyla A, Hill D, Chao J (2012) Intraoperative assessment of the umbilicopubic distance: a reliable anatomic landmark for transposition of the umbilicus. Aesthet Plast Surg 36:8–17

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rohrich RJ, Sorokin ES, Brown SA, Gibby DL (2003) Is the umbilicus truly midline? Clinical and medicolegal implications. Plast Reconstr Surg 112(1):259–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Parnia R, Ghorbani L, Sepehrvand N, Hatami S, Bazargan-Hejazi S (2012) Determining anatomical position of the umbilicus in Iranian girls, and providing quantitative indices and formula to determine neo-umbilicus during abdominoplasty. Indian J Plast Surg 45(1):94–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Baroudi R (1975) Umbilicoplasty. Clin Plast Surg 2:431–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Akbas H, Guneren E, Eroglu L, Uysal OA (2003) Natural-looking umbilicus as an important part of abdominoplasty. Aesthet Plast Surg 27:139–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pallua N, Markowicz MP, Grosse F, Walter S (2010) Aesthetically pleasant umbilicoplasty. Ann Plast Surg 64(6):722–725

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Southwell-Keely JP, Berry MG (2011) Umbilical reconstruction: a review of techniques. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 64:803–808

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Matarasso A, Swift RW, Rankin M (2006) Abdominoplasty and abdominal contour surgery: a national plastic surgery survey. Plast Reconstr Surg 117:1797–1808

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Selcan Kerimoglu for umbilicus drawings.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Kahramanmaraş Sutcu Imam University School of Medicine, Kahramanmaras, Turkey

    Fatma Bilgen, Alper Ural & Mehmet Bekerecioğlu

  2. Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medicana Health Group, Istanbul, Turkey

    Yakup Duman

Authors
  1. Fatma Bilgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yakup Duman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alper Ural
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mehmet Bekerecioğlu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All of the authors declare that they have all participated in the design, execution, and analysis of the paper and that they have approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatma Bilgen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

The material described is not under publication or consideration for publication elsewhere.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bilgen, F., Duman, Y., Ural, A. et al. Determining Anatomical Position of the Umbilicus in Turkish Population. Indian J Surg 82, 899–904 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-020-02239-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-020-02239-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation