Pınar Cagimni1, Figen Govsa2, Mehmet Asim Ozer1, Zuhal Kazak3. 1. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, 35100, Izmir, Turkey. 2. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, 35100, Izmir, Turkey. figen.govsa@ege.edu.tr. 3. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Dentistry, Kirikkale University, Kirikkale, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Investigation of the computerized dimensional anatomic location of the greater palatine foramen (GPF) and lesser palatine foramens (LPF) is important indicating site to collect palatal donor tissue, reconstructioning the orofacial area of the oncology patient and applying the greater palatine nerve block anesthesia. The aim of this study is to determine a patient-friendly landmark and to specify the precise location of the GPF in order to standardise certain anatomical marks of safe neurovascular bundle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 120 bony palates were examined to detect the position of the GPF and the LPF related to adjacent anatomical landmarks using a computer software program. The GPF was assessed regarding the position, the diameter and the distances between each foramen and the midline maxillary suture (MMS), the inner border of alveolar ridge (AR), posterior palatal border (PBB), and incisive foramen (IF). RESULTS: The GPF was identified as single in 81 %, double in 16 %, triple in 2 % and absent in 2 % of the specimens. The mean distances between the GPF and the MSS, the GPF and the AR, the GPF and the PPB, the GPF and the IF were 16, 4, 4, and 40 mm, respectively. In majority of the cases, the GPF was seen between the distal surfaces of the third maxillary molar (78 %). Single LPF was observed in 53.45 % of the skulls, two LPF were observed in 31 % of the skulls bilaterally and five LPF were rare in 2.1 % of the specimens. The LPF was most commonly at the junction of the palatine bone and the inner lamella of the pterygoid plate (71.9 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study made possible to investigate the variability of the GPF and the feasibility of the greater palatine neurovascular bundle, and to calculate the lengths of some parameters with the help of certain software. To collect the donor tissue of the neurovascular greater palatine network, each distance among the AR-GPF-PPB were equal to 4 mm. To estimate the possible length of the graft, the incision was made along the third and the second molar to the IF as 4 cm. The data we obtained within this study have been presented to help the surgeons avoid unexpected hemorrhage during the palatinal procedures such as posttraumatic dental reconstruction, maxillofacial tumor resections, palatal micro-implants, and dentofacial orthopedic surgery.
OBJECTIVE: Investigation of the computerized dimensional anatomic location of the greater palatine foramen (GPF) and lesser palatine foramens (LPF) is important indicating site to collect palatal donor tissue, reconstructioning the orofacial area of the oncology patient and applying the greater palatine nerve block anesthesia. The aim of this study is to determine a patient-friendly landmark and to specify the precise location of the GPF in order to standardise certain anatomical marks of safe neurovascular bundle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 120 bony palates were examined to detect the position of the GPF and the LPF related to adjacent anatomical landmarks using a computer software program. The GPF was assessed regarding the position, the diameter and the distances between each foramen and the midline maxillary suture (MMS), the inner border of alveolar ridge (AR), posterior palatal border (PBB), and incisive foramen (IF). RESULTS: The GPF was identified as single in 81 %, double in 16 %, triple in 2 % and absent in 2 % of the specimens. The mean distances between the GPF and the MSS, the GPF and the AR, the GPF and the PPB, the GPF and the IF were 16, 4, 4, and 40 mm, respectively. In majority of the cases, the GPF was seen between the distal surfaces of the third maxillary molar (78 %). Single LPF was observed in 53.45 % of the skulls, two LPF were observed in 31 % of the skulls bilaterally and five LPF were rare in 2.1 % of the specimens. The LPF was most commonly at the junction of the palatine bone and the inner lamella of the pterygoid plate (71.9 %). CONCLUSIONS: This study made possible to investigate the variability of the GPF and the feasibility of the greater palatine neurovascular bundle, and to calculate the lengths of some parameters with the help of certain software. To collect the donor tissue of the neurovascular greater palatine network, each distance among the AR-GPF-PPB were equal to 4 mm. To estimate the possible length of the graft, the incision was made along the third and the second molar to the IF as 4 cm. The data we obtained within this study have been presented to help the surgeons avoid unexpected hemorrhage during the palatinal procedures such as posttraumatic dental reconstruction, maxillofacial tumor resections, palatal micro-implants, and dentofacial orthopedic surgery.