| Literature DB >> 26346917 |
Venkatesh Gokuldas Kamath1, Muhammed Asif1, Radhakrishna Shetty2, Ramakrishna Avadhani1.
Abstract
Purpose. The structural integrity of foramen magnum is usually preserved in fire accidents and explosions due to its resistant nature and secluded anatomical position and this study attempts to determine its sexing potential. Methods. The sagittal and transverse diameters and area of foramen magnum of seventy-two skulls (41 male and 31 female) from south Indian population were measured. The analysis was done using Student's t-test, linear correlation, histogram, Q-Q plot, and Binary Logistic Regression (BLR) to obtain a model for sex determination. The predicted probabilities of BLR were analysed using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve. Result. BLR analysis and ROC curve revealed that the predictability of the dimensions in sexing the crania was 69.6% for sagittal diameter, 66.4% for transverse diameter, and 70.3% for area of foramen. Conclusion. The sexual dimorphism of foramen magnum dimensions is established. However, due to considerable overlapping of male and female values, it is unwise to singularly rely on the foramen measurements. However, considering the high sex predictability percentage of its dimensions in the present study and the studies preceding it, the foramen measurements can be used to supplement other sexing evidence available so as to precisely ascertain the sex of the skeleton.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26346917 PMCID: PMC4540976 DOI: 10.1155/2015/459428
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anat Res Int ISSN: 2090-2743
Figure 1The base of the skull showing the sagittal dimension (S) and transverse dimension (T) of the foramen magnum.
It depicts descriptive statistics of the sagittal and transverse diameters (mm).
|
| Mean | Standard deviation | Minimum–maximum | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sagittal diameter | 72 | 32.26 mm | 3.5 | 24.41–42.87 |
| Transverse diameter | 72 | 26.29 mm | 2.5 | 20.22–34.08 |
Figure 2The values of sagittal diameter (mm) revealed a high interindividual variability.
Figure 3The values of transverse diameter (mm) revealed a high interindividual variability.
Figure 4The Q-Q plot of sagittal diameter shows normal distribution.
Figure 5The Q-Q plot of transverse diameter shows normal distribution.
It depicts the descriptive analysis of sagittal and transverse diameters (mm) in both sexes.
| Male ( | Female ( |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Range | Mean (S.D) | Range | Mean (S.D) | ||
| Sagittal diameter | 26.09–42.87 | 33.21 (3.25) | 24.41–42.46 | 30.99 (3.49) | 0.007 |
| Transverse diameter | 21.69–34.08 | 26.92 (2.52) | 20.22–30.71 | 25.45 (2.31) | 0.013 |
| Area ( | 444.63–1076.44 | 705.97 (119.85) | 433.24–942.79 | 622.64 (109) | 0.0034 |
| Area ( | 448.43–1083.80 | 715.32 (122.05) | 443.01–982.40 | 630.57 (113.14) | 0.0036 |
It depicts the Binary Logistic Regression model for the estimation of sex from the foramen dimensions. (The cut-off value is 0.5.)
| Variable | BLR model | Wald |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Sagittal diameter ( | −6.628 + 0.216 ( | 6.409 | 0.011 |
| Transverse diameter ( | −6.406 + 0.255 ( | 5.614 | 0.018 |
| Area ( | −4.307 + 0.007 ( | 7.392 | 0.007 |
| Area ( | −4.246 + 0.007 ( | 7.251 | 0.007 |
Figure 6ROC curve for the predicted probabilities of sagittal diameter.
Figure 7ROC curve for the predicted probabilities of transverse diameter.
Figure 8ROC curve for the predicted probabilities of area using Radinsky's formula.
Figure 9ROC curve for the predicted probabilities of area using Teixeria's formula.
Figure 10A moderately positive correlation between the sex-pooled sagittal and transverse diameter (mm) of the foramen magnum (r = 0.549, p < 0.001).
Figure 11It depicts the ethnic variability of the foramen magnum dimensions in millimetres in different ethnic groups. Most of the values are obtained from a study by Martin, 1928 [17], and Nakashima, 1986 [10]. The data below shows the regions represented by the numbers. A study by Gruber et al., 2009 [6]. A study by Raghavendra Babu et al., 2012 [9]. The numbers 37 and 38 represent the present study in males and females, respectively. 1 = Germans m, 2 = Swiss f, 3 = Elsasee m, 4 = Elsasee f, 5 = Romans m, 6 = Romans f, 7 = Tyrolese, 8 = Bavarians m, 9 = Romans f, 10 = Swiss Wallis m, 11 = Swiss Wallis f, 12 = Swiss-Danis, 13 = Ainos m, 14 = Ainos f, 15 = Japanese m, 16 = Japanese f, 17 = Bashkirs m, 18 = Telengets, 19 = Chinese, 20 = Buryats, 21 = Torguts, 22 = Malays m, 23 = Malays f, 24 = Australians m, 25 = Australians f, 26 = Paltacalos m, 27 = Paltacalos f, 28 = Middle Kyushites m, 29 = Kantoites m, 30 = North Kyushites m, 31 = Yoron Islander/Fuschen Chinese, 32 = Kikai Islanders m, 33 = Shlingol Mongolians m, 34 = Central Western Europe, 35 = Indian male, 36 = Indian female, 37 = Indian male (present study), and 38 = Indian female (present study).