open access

Vol 77, No 3 (2018)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2018-02-26
Submitted: 2017-11-15
Accepted: 2018-02-05
Get Citation

Morphometric analysis of the sella turcica in Turkish individuals with different dentofacial skeletal patterns

G. Magat, S. Ozcan Sener
DOI: 10.5603/FM.a2018.0022
·
Pubmed: 29500897
·
Folia Morphol 2018;77(3):543-550.

open access

Vol 77, No 3 (2018)
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Published online: 2018-02-26
Submitted: 2017-11-15
Accepted: 2018-02-05

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the morphometric analysis of sella turcica in a Turkish population according to gender, age, and dentofacial skeletal type and to investigate the prevalence of sella turcica shapes in different dentofacial skeletal types. Materials and methods: The lateral cephalometric radiographs of 362 patients (145 males, 217 females) were included and grouped by age, gender, and dentofacial skeletal patterns. Linear dimensions of sella turcica, which include the length, height, and diameter, were measured, and the shapes of sella turcica were evaluated. Results: The anatomical variants of the sella turcica in this study were normal morphology (39.0%), followed by pyramidal shape (15.5%), double contour of floor (14.6%), oblique anterior wall (14.4%), irregular dorsum sella (8.6%), and sella turcica bridge (8.0%). Significant differences were found between sella turcica shapes and dentofacial skeletal types (p < 0.01). Females had greater diameter size of sella turcica than males (p < 0.01). In addition, the subjects in the 15–21 age group had larger sella turcica depths and diameters than the subjects in the 9–14 age group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). However, no significant differences were found between age groups in terms of sella turcica lengths (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Results from this study showed that the sample had a higher rate of morphological variation (39% normal, 61% other types) in comparison with other populations or ethnic groups. The class III patients had more irregularity (notching) types in the posterior part of the dorsum sella and fewer oblique anterior wall types than the others. Linear dimensions and morphological types of sella turcica in this study can be used as reference for additional investigators, such as radiologists, orthodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, and neurosurgeons, to interpret and plan surgical procedures involving the sellar region.

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the morphometric analysis of sella turcica in a Turkish population according to gender, age, and dentofacial skeletal type and to investigate the prevalence of sella turcica shapes in different dentofacial skeletal types. Materials and methods: The lateral cephalometric radiographs of 362 patients (145 males, 217 females) were included and grouped by age, gender, and dentofacial skeletal patterns. Linear dimensions of sella turcica, which include the length, height, and diameter, were measured, and the shapes of sella turcica were evaluated. Results: The anatomical variants of the sella turcica in this study were normal morphology (39.0%), followed by pyramidal shape (15.5%), double contour of floor (14.6%), oblique anterior wall (14.4%), irregular dorsum sella (8.6%), and sella turcica bridge (8.0%). Significant differences were found between sella turcica shapes and dentofacial skeletal types (p < 0.01). Females had greater diameter size of sella turcica than males (p < 0.01). In addition, the subjects in the 15–21 age group had larger sella turcica depths and diameters than the subjects in the 9–14 age group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). However, no significant differences were found between age groups in terms of sella turcica lengths (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Results from this study showed that the sample had a higher rate of morphological variation (39% normal, 61% other types) in comparison with other populations or ethnic groups. The class III patients had more irregularity (notching) types in the posterior part of the dorsum sella and fewer oblique anterior wall types than the others. Linear dimensions and morphological types of sella turcica in this study can be used as reference for additional investigators, such as radiologists, orthodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, and neurosurgeons, to interpret and plan surgical procedures involving the sellar region.

Get Citation

Keywords

sella turcica; skeletal; gender; age; lateral cephalometric

About this article
Title

Morphometric analysis of the sella turcica in Turkish individuals with different dentofacial skeletal patterns

Journal

Folia Morphologica

Issue

Vol 77, No 3 (2018)

Pages

543-550

Published online

2018-02-26

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2018.0022

Pubmed

29500897

Bibliographic record

Folia Morphol 2018;77(3):543-550.

Keywords

sella turcica
skeletal
gender
age
lateral cephalometric

Authors

G. Magat
S. Ozcan Sener

References (45)
  1. Abdel-Kader HM. Sella turcica bridges in orthodontic and orthognathic surgery patients. A retrospective cephalometric study. Aust Orthod J. 2007; 23(1): 30–35.
  2. Abu Ghaida JH, Mistareehi AJ, Mustafa AG, et al. The normal dimensions of the sella turcica in Jordanians: a study on lateral cephalograms. Folia Morphol. 2017; 76(1): 1–9.
  3. Alkofide EA. Sella turcica morphology and dimensions in cleft subjects. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2008; 45(6): 647–653.
  4. Alkofide EA. The shape and size of the sella turcica in skeletal Class I, Class II, and Class III Saudi subjects. Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29(5): 457–463.
  5. Ammar A, Al-Sultan A, Al Mulhim F, et al. Empty sella syndrome: does it exist in children? J Neurosurg. 1999; 91(6): 960–963.
  6. Argyropoulou M, Perignon F, Brunelle F, et al. Height of normal pituitary gland as a function of age evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging in children. Pediatr Radiol. 1991; 21(4): 247–249.
  7. Axelsson S, Storhaug K, Kjaer I. Post-natal size and morphology of the sella turcica in Williams syndrome. Eur J Orthod. 2004; 26(6): 613–621.
  8. Axelsson S, Storhaug K, Kjaer I. Post-natal size and morphology of the sella turcica. Longitudinal cephalometric standards for Norwegians between 6 and 21 years of age. Eur J Orthod. 2004; 26(6): 597–604.
  9. Baleriaux D, Jacquemin C, Lemort M. [Magnetic resonance imaging of the pituitary gland and the sella turcica region. Normal and pathological aspect]. Ann Endocrinol (Paris). 1990; 51(3-4): 173–180.
  10. Becktor JP, Einersen S, Kjaer I. A sella turcica bridge in subjects with severe craniofacial deviations. Eur J Orthod. 2000; 22(1): 69–74.
  11. Camp JD. Normal and pathological anatomy of the sella turcica as revealed by roentgenograms. Am J Roentgenol. 1924; 12: 143–56.
  12. Canigur Bavbek N, Dincer M. Dimensions and morphologic variations of sella turcica in type 1 diabetic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014; 145(2): 179–187.
  13. Chauhan P, Kalra S, Mongia S, et al. Morphometric analysis of sella turcica in North Indian population: a radiological study. Int J Res Med Sci. 2014; 2(2): 521.
  14. Choi WJ, Hwang EH, Lee SR. The study of shape and size of normal sella turcica in cephalometric radiographs. Korean J Oral Maxillofacial Radiol. 2001; 31(1): 43–49.
  15. Dostálová S, Sonka K, Smahel Z, et al. Cephalometric assessment of cranial abnormalities in patients with acromegaly. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2003; 31(2): 80–87.
  16. Jones RM, Faqir A, Millett DT, et al. Bridging and dimensions of sella turcica in subjects treated by surgical-orthodontic means or orthodontics only. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75(5): 714–718.
  17. Kantor ML, Norton LA. Normal radiographic anatomy and common anomalies seen in cephalometric films. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 91(5): 414–426.
  18. Kisling E. Cranial morphology in Down's syndrome: A comparative roentgenencephalometric study in adult males. Munksgaard. 1966.
  19. Kjaer I, Hansen N, Becktor KB, et al. Craniofacial morphology, dentition, and skeletal maturity in four siblings with Seckel syndrome. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2001; 38(6): 645–651.
  20. Konwar SK, Singhla A, Bayan R. Morphological (Length, Depth, and Diameter) Study of Sella Turcica in Different Mandibular Growth Patterns in Indians IJDMS. 2016; 3(3): 1–7.
  21. Korayem M, AlKofide E. Size and shape of the sella turcica in subjects with Down syndrome. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015; 18(1): 43–50.
  22. Kucia A, Jankowski T, Siewniak M, et al. Sella turcica anomalies on lateral cephalometric radiographs of Polish children. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2014; 43(8): 20140165.
  23. Leonardi R, Barbato E, Vichi M, et al. A sella turcica bridge in subjects with dental anomalies. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28(6): 580–585.
  24. Luong HM, Ahn JH, Bollu P, et al. Sella Turcica Variations in Skeletal Class I, Class II, and Class III Adult Subjects: A CBCT Study. J Dent Oral Biol. 2016; 1(3): 1015–1021.
  25. Marşan G, Öztaş E. Incidence of bridging and dimensions of sella turcica in Class I and III Turkish adult female patients. World J Orthod. 2009; 10(2): 99–103.
  26. Melsen B, Melsen F. The postnatal development of the palatomaxillary region studied on human autopsy material. Am J Orthod. 1982; 82(4): 329–342.
  27. Meyer-Marcotty P, Reuther T, Stellzig-Eisenhauer A. Bridging of the sella turcica in skeletal Class III subjects. Eur J Orthod. 2010; 32(2): 148–153.
  28. Moffitt AH. Discovery of pathologies by orthodontists on lateral cephalograms. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(1): 58–63.
  29. Pisaneschi M, Kapoor G. Imaging the sella and parasellar region. Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2005; 15(1): 203–219.
  30. Preston CB. Pituitary fossa size and facial type. Am J Orthod. 1979; 75(3): 259–263.
  31. Russell BG, Kjaer I. Postnatal structure of the sella turcica in Down syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 1999; 87(2): 183–188.
  32. Sakran AM, Khan MA, Altaf FMN, et al. et al.. A morphometric study of the sella turcica: gender effect. Int J Anat Res. 2015; 3(1): 927–934.
  33. Sari S, Sari E, Akgun V, et al. Measures of pituitary gland and stalk: from neonate to adolescence. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2014; 27(11-12): 1071–1076.
  34. Sathyanarayana HP, Kailasam V, Chitharanjan AB. Sella turcica-Its importance in orthodontics and craniofacial morphology. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2013; 10(5): 571–575.
  35. Shah AM, Bashir U, Ilyas T. The shape and size of the sella turcica in skeletal Class I, II and III in patients presenting at Islamic International Dental Hospital, Islamabad. PODJ. 2011; 31(1).
  36. Silverman FN. Roentgen standards fo-size of the pituitary fossa from infancy through adolescence. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1957; 78(3): 451–460.
  37. Skrzat J, Kozerska M, Wróbel A. Micro-computed tomography study of the abnormal osseous extensions of sella turcica. Folia Morphol. 2014; 73(1): 19–23.
  38. Soaker PC, S N. The comparative study of size of sella turcica in different skeletal types in local population: an in vitro study. Indian J Appl Res. 2014; 4: 160–162.
  39. Tetradis S, Kantor ML. Prevalence of skeletal and dental anomalies and normal variants seen in cephalometric and other radiographs of orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116(5): 572–577.
  40. Valizadeh S, Shahbeig S, Mohseni S, et al. Correlation of shape and size of sella turcica with the type of facial skeletal class in an iranian group. Iran J Radiol. 2015; 12(3): e16059.
  41. Venieratos D, Anagnostopoulou S, Garidou A. A new morphometric method for the sella turcica and the hypophyseal fossa and its clinical relevance. Folia Morphol. 2005; 64(4): 240–247.
  42. Wang J, Wang R, Lu Y, et al. Anatomical analysis on the lateral bone window of the sella turcica: a study on 530 adult dry skull base specimens. Int J Med Sci. 2014; 11(2): 134–141.
  43. Weisberg LA, Zimmerman EA, Frantz AG. Diagnosis and evaluation of patients with an enlarged sella turcica. Am J Med. 1976; 61(5): 590–596.
  44. Yasa Y, Ocak A, Bayrakdar IS, et al. Morphometric analysis of sella turcica using cone beam computed tomography. J Craniofac Surg. 2017; 28(1): e70–e74.
  45. Zagga AD, Ahmed H, Tadros AA, et al. Description of the normal variants of the anatomical shapes of the sella turcica using plain radiographs: experience from Sokoto, Northwestern Nigeria. Ann Afr Med. 2008; 7(2): 77–81.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By  "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl