Periorbital Anthropometric Measurements

  • Ümit Beden
  • Matej Beltram


Periorbital anthropometric measurements are important in defining cosmetic, pathologic and ethnic variations. In this term, assessment of periorbital landmarks is categorized into three subclasses: periorbital soft tissue, bony orbit, and ocular projection. Measurements of periorbital soft tissue include position of eyelids, height of eyelid skin crease and eyebrows, palpebral slant angle, position of the canthal commissura, epicanthal folds, and horizontal and vertical palpebral apertures. Additionally, margin reflex distances, which reflect eyelid position relative to the eye globe, are included in most cases. Function of the levator palpebralis and its indirect indicator, margin-limbal distance, are other parameters involved in evaluation of periorbital soft tissue. The bony orbit is the socket that encompasses the extra ocular muscles, and the eye with its appendages. Its shape and dimensions are noteworthy in many congenital and traumatic craniofacial malformations. In this respect, interorbital distance, interorbital angles, inter-canthal distances (between both medial and lateral canthi), and interpupillary distance are included during evaluation of the subjects. Ideally, assessment of bony orbit requires imaging techniques. The last parameter of the periorbital anthropometry, the ocular projection, is one of the most widely used parameters in diagnosis of orbital disorders. It reflects the intraorbital volume to content relationship. It is especially significant in orbital tumors and Graves’ orbithopathy.


Lower Eyelid Eyelid Margin Medial Canthus Lateral Canthus Levator Function 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Horizontal palpebral aperture


Lateral canthal tendon


Vertical palpebral aperture


Margin – limbal distance


Margin – reflex distance


Margin – reflex distance of the upper eyelid


Margin – reflex distance of the lower eyelid


Inner intercanthal distance


Outer intercanthal distance


Interpupillary distance


  1. Barretto, R. L., & Mathog, R. H. (1999). Orbital measurement in black and white populations. Laryngoscope, 109(7 Pt 1), 1051–1054.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beden, U., Yalaz, M., Gungor, I., Sullu, Y., & Erkan, D. (2007). Lateral canthal dynamics, correlation with periorbital anthropometric measurements, and effect of age and sleep preference side on eyelid metrics and lateral canthal tendon. Eur J Ophthalmol, 17(2), 143–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Beden, U., Ozarslan, Y., Ozturk, H. E., Sonmez, B., Erkan, D., & Oge, I. (2008). Exophthalmometry values of Turkish adult population and the effect of age, sex, refractive status, and Hertel base values on Hertel readings. Eur J Ophthalmol, 18(2), 165–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedrossian, E. H. (2002). Surgical anatomy of the eyelids. In D. C. Della Rocca, Bedrossian, H.E., Arthurs, B.P., (Ed.), Ophthalmic Plastic Surgery. Decision Making and Techniques. (pp. 23–43). London: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  5. Bilen, H., Gullulu, G., & Akcay, G. (2007). Exophthalmometric values in a normal Turkish population living in the northeastern part of Turkey. Thyroid, 17(6), 525–528.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bozkir, M. G., Karakas, P., & Oguz, O. (2003). Measurements of soft tissue orbits in Turkish young adults. Surg Radiol Anat, 25(1), 54–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cartwright, M. J., Kurumety, U. R., Nelson, C. C., Frueh, B. R., & Musch, D. C. (1994). Measurements of upper eyelid and eyebrow dimensions in healthy white individuals. Am J Ophthalmol, 117(2), 231–234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. de Juan, E., Jr., Hurley, D. P., & Sapira, J. D. (1980). Racial differences in normal values of proptosis. Arch Intern Med, 140(9), 1230–1231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dunsky, I. L. (1992). Normative data for hertel exophthalmometry in a normal adult black population. Optom Vis Sci, 69(7), 562–564.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farkas, L. G., Sohm, P., Kolar, J. C., Katic, M. J., & Munro, I. R. (1985). Inclinations of the facial profile: art versus reality. Plast Reconstr Surg, 75(4), 509–519.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fledelius, H. C., & Stubgaard, M. (1986). Changes in eye position during growth and adult life as based on exophthalmometry, interpupillary distance, and orbital distance measurements. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 64(5), 481–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fox, S. A. (1966). The palpebral fissure. Am J Ophthalmol, 62(1), 73–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Freihofer, H. P. (1980). Inner intercanthal and interorbital distances. J Maxillofac Surg, 8(4), 324–326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fuchs, M., Iosub, S., Bingol, N., & Gromisch, D. S. (1980). Palpebral fissure size revisited. J Pediatr, 96(1), 77–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gioia, V. M., Linberg, J. V., & McCormick, S. A. (1987). The anatomy of the lateral canthal tendon. Arch Ophthalmol, 105(4), 529–532.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gonzales, F., Castro, F. A., Schneider, K., & Lozano, M. (2005). Measurements of yhe periocular facial area with Web-bawseed software. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 11(7), 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones, K. L., Hanson, J. W., & Smith, D. W. (1978). Palpebral fissure size in newborn infants. J Pediatr, 92(5), 787.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kashkouli, M. B., Beigi, B., Noorani, M. M., & Nojoomi, M. (2003). Hertel exophthalmometry: reliability and interobserver variation. Orbit, 22(4), 239–245.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim, I. T., & Choi, J. B. (2001). Normal range of exophthalmos values on orbit computerized tomography in Koreans. Ophthalmologica, 215(3), 156–162.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kumari Sodhi, P., Gupta, V. P., & Pandey, R. M. (2001). Exophthalmometric values in a normal Indian population. Orbit, 20(1), 1–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kunjur, J., Sabesan, T., & Ilankovan, V. (2006). Anthropometric analysis of eyebrows and eyelids: an inter-racial study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 44(2), 89–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McCord, C. D., Boswell, C. B., & Hester, T. R. (2003). Lateral canthal anchoring. Plast Reconstr Surg, 112(1), 222–237; discussion 238–239.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Migliori, M. E., & Gladstone, G. J. (1984). Determination of the normal range of exophthalmometric values for black and white adults. Am J Ophthalmol, 98(4), 438–442.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mourits, M. P., Lombardo, S. H., van der Sluijs, F. A., & Fenton, S. (2004). Reliability of exophthalmos measurement and the exophthalmometry value distribution in a healthy Dutch population and in Graves’ patients. An exploratory study. Orbit, 23(3), 161–168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Murphy, W. K., & Laskin, D. M. (1990). Intercanthal and interpupillary distance in the black population. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol, 69(6), 676–680.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nucci, P., Brancato, R., Bandello, F., Alfarano, R., & Bianchi, S. (1989). Normal exophthalmometric values in children. Am J Ophthalmol, 108(5), 582–584.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Odunze, M., Rosenberg, D. S., & Few, J. W. (2008). Periorbital aging and ethnic considerations: a focus on the lateral canthal complex. Plast Reconstr Surg, 121(3), 1002–1008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Osuobeni, E. P., & al-Gharni, S. S. (1994). Ocular and facial anthropometry of young adult males of Arab origin. Optom Vis Sci, 71(1), 33–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ozkagnici, A., Buyukmumcu, M., Zengin, N., Gunduz, K., & Koc, H. (2001). Ocular and periorbital anthropometric measurements in term Turkish newborns. Surg Radiol Anat, 23(5), 321–324.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ozturk, F., Yavas, G., & Inan, U. U. (2006). Normal periocular anthropometric measurements in the Turkish population. Ophthalmic Epidemiol, 13(2), 145–149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Park, D. H. (2007). Anthropometric analysis of the slant of palpebral fissures. Plast Reconstr Surg, 119(5), 1624–1626.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Park, D. H., Choi, W. S., Yoon, S. H., & Song, C. H. (2008a). Anthropometry of asian eyelids by age. Plast Reconstr Surg, 121(4), 1405–1413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Park, D. H., Jung, J. M., & Song, C. H. (2008b). Anthropometric analysis of levator muscle function. Plast Reconstr Surg, 121(4), 1181–1187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Segni, M., Bartley, G. B., Garrity, J. A., Bergstralh, E. J., & Gorman, C. A. (2002). Comparability of proptosis measurements by different techniques. Am J Ophthalmol, 133(6), 813–818.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Singh, J. R., & Banerjee, S. (1983). Normal values for interpupillary, inner canthal and outer canthal distances in an Indian population. Hum Hered, 33(5), 326–328.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. van den Bosch, W. A., Leenders, I., & Mulder, P. (1999). Topographic anatomy of the eyelids, and the effects of sex and age. Br J Ophthalmol, 83(3), 347–352.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vardizer, Y., Berendschot, T. T., & Mourits, M. P. (2005). Effect of exophthalmometer design on its accuracy. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg, 21(6), 427–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ophthalmology DepartmentOndokuz Mayis UniversitySamsunTurkey

Personalised recommendations