Investigating the Anatomy and Anthropometric Analysis of the Optic Canal and Surrounding Structures in Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Images

Document Type : مقاله‌های پژوهشی

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khosragan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

2 Postgraduate Student, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khosragan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

4 Dental Student, Dental Students Research Center, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran

10.48305/v0i0.1834

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate the anatomy and anthropometric analysis of the optic canal and surrounding structures in Cone-beam computed tomography images.
Materials and Methods: In this descriptive-analytical study carried out from Autumn 2020 to Summer 2020, CBCT images from 150 patients referred to a medical center in Tehran were selected. The shape and length of the optic canal, width of the midpoint of the canal, the dimensions of the orbital cavity and the distance between the optic canal and the nasal columella were measured. Data were analyzed using the t-test and one-way ANOVA analysis (p value < 0.05).
Results: shape of the canal on the right side was 64.7% funnel-shaped, 32% hourglass-shaped and 3.3% amorphous and on the left side, 64% funnel-shaped, 34.7% hourglass-shaped and 1.3% amorphous among individuals. The average canal length on the right side was significantly larger than the left side, but the mean width of the midpoint of the canal on the right side was significantly less than on the left side (p value < 0.001). The height of the orbital cavity on the right side was significantly shorter than on the left side (p value = 0.034), but the width of the orbital was not significantly different between the two sides (0.232). The distance between the nasion to the orbit end of the canal and the cranium end of the canal, as well as the distance between the nasal columella to the orbit end and the cranium end of the canal, were significantly longer in men than in women and also significantly less on the right side than on the left side (p value < 0.001).
Conclusion: Knowing the anatomy of the optic canal will help prevent unwanted complications.
Keywords: Cone-beam computed tomography, Optic nerve, Orbit.

References

1. Regoli M, Bertelli E. The revised anatomy of the canals connecting the orbit with the cranial cavity. Orbit 2017; 36(2): 110-7.
2. De Moraes CG. Anatomy of the visual pathways. J Glaucoma 2013; 22(Suppl 5); S2-7.
3. Urik M, Šlapak I, Pavlovska D, Privarova E. Exostosis of the optic canal in a child--a rare diagnosis in a paediatric ear, nose and throat setting: a case report. J Med Case Rep 2014; 8: 454.
4. van Overbeeke J, Sekhar L. Microanatomy of the blood supply to the optic nerve. Orbit 2003; 22(2): 81-8.
5. Hart CK, Theodosopoulos PV, Zimmer LA. Anatomy of the optic canal: a computed tomography study of endoscopic nerve decompression. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 2009; 118(12): 839-44.
6. Yilmazlar S, Saraydaroglu O, Korfali E. Anatomical aspects in the transsphenoidal-transethmoidal approach to the optic canal: an anatomic-cadaveric study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2012; 40(7): e198-205.
7. Cutright B, Quillopa N, Schubert W. An anthropometric analysis of the key foramina for maxillofacial surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003; 61(3): 354-7.
8. Feldkamp LA, Davis LC, Kress JW. Practical cone-beam algorithm. J Opt Soc Am A 1984; 1(6): 612-9.
9. Naji P, Alsufyani NA, Lagravère MO. Reliability of anatomic structures as landmarks in three-dimensional cephalometric analysis using CBCT. Angle Orthod 2014; 84(5): 762-72.
10. Zizelmann C, Gellrich NC, Metzger MC, Schoen R, Schmelzeisen R, Schramm A. Computer-assisted reconstruction of orbital floor based on cone beam tomography. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 45(1): 79-80.
11. Brisco J, Fuller K, Lee N, Andrew D. Cone beam computed tomography for imaging orbital trauma--image quality and radiation dose compared with conventional multislice computed tomography. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 52(1): 76-80.
12. Ganz SD. Computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing applications using CT and cone beam CT scanning technology. Dent Clin North Am 2008; 52(4): 777-808.
13. Sinanoglu A, Orhan K, Kursun S, Inceoglu B, Oztas B. Evaluation of optic canal and surrounding structures using cone beam computed tomography: Considerations for maxillofacial surgery. J Craniofac Surg 2016; 27(5): 1327-30.
14. Liu S, Chen Y, Song J, Tian Y, Xia C, Li Y. Optic canal location by computed tomography. J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24(1): 284-6.
15. Zhang X LY, Olson D, Olson D, Fleischman D. Evaluation of optic canal anatomy and symmetry using CT. BMJ Open Ophthalmol 2019; 4(1): e000302.
16. Ukoha U, Egwu OA, Okafor IJ, Ogugua PC, Onwudinjo O, Udemezue O. Orbital dimensions of adult male nigerians: a direct measurement study using dry skulls. Int J Biol Med Res 2011; 2(3): 688-90.
17. Friedrich RE, Bruhn M, Lohse C. Cone-beam computed tomography of the orbit and optic canal volumes. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016; 44(9): 1342-9.
Journal of Isfahan Dental School
Volume 17, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
December 2020
Pages 425-434

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics