Download PDF
J Neurol Surg B Skull Base 2022; 83(S 02): e75-e82
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1722712
Original Article

Morphological Measurement and Anatomical Variations of the Clivus Using Computed Tomography

Gozde Serindere
1   Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, Faculty of Dentistry, Hatay, Turkey
,
Kaan Gunduz
2   Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Faculty of Dentistry, Samsun, Turkey
,
Hakan Avsever
3   Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Health Sciences University, Gulhane Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the clivus morphology, including fossa navicularis magna (FNM), canalis basilaris medianus (CBM), and craniopharyngeal canal (CC), on computed tomography (CT) images.

Design This is a retrospective study.

Setting Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Dentomaxillofacial Radiology.

Participants The CT images of 500 patients (253 males; 247 females) were evaluated.

Main Outcome Measures The prevalence of FNM, CBM, and CPC; the length, width, and depth of FNM; and CBM types were recorded. Also, a morphological analysis of the clivus (length of the clivus, angle between the clivus and the posterior margin of the foramen magnum, angle between the clivus and the dens axis, and anteroposterior diameter of the foramen magnum) was performed.

Results FNM was identified in 5.4%, CBM in 4%, and CC in 0.8% of the study group. Type 5 CBM was not found. Type 6 was the most common CBM type. There was no significant correlation between the age and gender of patients with FNM. There were significant differences between the clivus length, the angle between the clivus and the dens axis, the anteroposterior diameter of the foramen magnum, and gender. Also, there was a significant difference between the angle between the clivus and the foramen magnum and age.

Conclusions The anatomical variations of the clivus are rare and important for the oral and maxillofacial radiologist to make the differential diagnosis. These anatomical variations should not be confused with pathologic formations. The morphological measurements and anatomical variations of the clivus can be evaluated in detail on CT images.

Keywords

anatomical variation - clivus - computed tomography - skull base


Publication History

Received: 13 June 2020

Accepted: 15 November 2020

Article published online:
18 February 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Bayrak S, Göller Bulut D, Orhan K. Prevalence of anatomical variants in the clivus: fossa navicularis magna, canalis basilaris medianus, and craniopharyngeal canal. Surg Radiol Anat 2019; 41 (04) 477-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Syed AZ, Mupparapu M. Fossa navicularis magna detection on cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2016; 46 (01) 47-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ersan N. Prevalence and morphometric features of fossa navicularis on cone beam computed tomography in Turkish population. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2017; 76 (04) 715-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Currarino G. Canalis basilaris medianus and related defects of the basiocciput. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1988; 9 (01) 208-211
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Jacquemin C, Bosley TM, al Saleh M, Mullaney P. Canalis basilaris medianus: MRI. Neuroradiology 2000; 42 (02) 121-123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kaushik C, Ramakrishnaiah R, Angtuaco EJ. Ectopic pituitary adenoma in persistent craniopharyngeal canal: case report and literature review. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2010; 34 (04) 612-614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 McRAE DL. Bony abnormalities in the region of the foramen magnum: correlation of the anatomic and neurologic findings. Acta Radiol 1953; 40 2–3 335-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 de Geus CM, Bergman JEH, van Ravenswaaij-Arts CMA, Meiners LC. Imaging of clival hypoplasia in charge syndrome and hypothesis for development: a case-control study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018; 39 (10) 1938-1942
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fernandes YB, Ramina R, Campos-Herrera CR, Borges G. Evolutionary hypothesis for Chiari type I malformation. Med Hypotheses 2013; 81 (04) 715-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Erçakmak Güneş B, Vatansever A. Türk Toplumunda Foramen Magnum ve Kafa Tabanındaki Oluşumların İlişkileri. Kafkas J Med Sci 2018; 8 (03) 207-213
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chaurasia A, Katheriya G, Patil R. Radio-morphometric evaluation of Clivus in Indian ethinicity: a cone beam computed tomography study. J Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2017; 3 (01) 35-41
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Basaran R, Efendioglu M, Senol M, Ozdogan S, Isik N. Morphometric analysis of posterior fossa and craniovertebral junction in subtypes of Chiari malformation. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2018; 169: 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Mahajan D. An anatomical perspective of human occipital condyles and foramen magnum with neurosurgical correlates. Anatomy 2013; 6–7: 29-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Govsa F, Ozer MA, Celik S, Ozmutaf NM. Three-dimensional anatomic landmarks of the foramen magnum for the craniovertebral junction. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22 (03) 1073-1076
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Zdilla MJ, Russell ML, Bliss KN, Mangus KR, Koons AW. The size and shape of the foramen magnum in man. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine 2017; 8 (03) 205-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Madadin M, Menezes RG, Al Saif HS. et al. Morphometric evaluation of the foramen magnum for sex determination: a study from Saudi Arabia. J Forensic Leg Med 2017; 46: 66-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Henderson Sr FC, Henderson Jr FC, Wilson IV WA, Mark AS, Koby M. Utility of the clivo-axial angle in assessing brainstem deformity: pilot study and literature review. Neurosurg Rev 2018; 41 (01) 149-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Calandrelli R, Panfili M, D'Apolito G. et al. Quantitative approach to the posterior cranial fossa and craniocervical junction in asymptomatic children with achondroplasia. Neuroradiology 2017; 59 (10) 1031-1041
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Smoker WR. Craniovertebral junction: normal anatomy, craniometry, and congenital anomalies. Radiographics 1994; 14 (02) 255-277
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Xu S, Gong R. Clivodens angle: a new diagnostic method for basilar invagination at computed tomography. Spine 2016; 41 (17) 1365-1371
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rossi G. Il canale cranio-faringeo e la fossetta faringea, ricerche antropologiche. Monogr Zool Ital 1891; 2: 117-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Romiti G. La fossetta faringea nell'osso occipitale dell'uomo. AttiSoc Toscana Sci Nat 1890; 11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rizzo A. Canale cranio faringeo, fossetta faringea, interparietali e preinterparietali nel cranio umano. Monogr Zool Ital 1901; 12: 241-252
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ray B, Kalthur SG, Kumar B, Bhat MRK, D'souza AS, Gulati HS. Morphological variations in the basioccipital region of the South Indian skull. Nepal J Med Sci 2015; 3 (02) 124-128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cankal F, Ugur HC, Tekdemir I, Elhan A, Karahan T, Sevim A. Fossa navicularis: anatomic variation at the skull base. Clin Anat 2004; 17 (02) 118-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kaplan FA, Yesilova E, Bayrakdar IS, Ugurlu M. Evaluation of the relationship between age and gender of fossa navicularis magna with cone-beam computed tomography in orthodontic subpopulation. J Anat Soc India 2019; 68: 201-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Magat G. Evaluation of morphometric features of fossa navicularis using cone-beam computed tomography in a Turkish subpopulation. Imaging Sci Dent 2019; 49 (03) 209-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Syed AZ, Zahedpasha S, Rathore SA, Mupparapu M. Evaluation of canalis basilaris medianus using cone-beam computed tomography. Imaging Sci Dent 2016; 46 (02) 141-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Akkoca Kaplan F, Bayrakdar IS, Bilgir E. Incidence of anomalous canals in the base of the skull: a retrospective radio-anatomical study using cone-beam computed tomography. Surg Radiol Anat 2020; 42 (02) 171-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Arey LB. The craniopharyngeal canal reviewed and reinterpreted. Anat Rec 1950; 106 (01) 1-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Nagashima C, Kubota S. Craniocervical abnormalities. Modern diagnosis and a comprehensive surgical approach. Neurosurg Rev 1983; 6 (04) 187-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Botelho RV, Ferreira ED. Angular craniometry in craniocervical junction malformation. Neurosurg Rev 2013; 36 (04) 603-610 , discussion 610
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ferreira JA, Botelho RV. The odontoid process invagination in normal subjects, Chiari malformation and basilar invagination patients: pathophysiologic correlations with angular craniometry. Surg Neurol Int 2015; 6: 118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Prabhu SP, Zinkus T, Cheng AG, Rahbar R. Clival osteomyelitis resulting from spread of infection through the fossa navicularis magna in a child. Pediatr Radiol 2009; 39 (09) 995-998
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Segal N, Atamne E, Shelef I, Zamir S, Landau D. Intracranial infection caused by spreading through the fossa naviclaris magna: a case report and review of the literature. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2013; 77 (12) 1919-1921
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hemphill M, Freeman JM, Martinez CR, Nager GT, Long DM, Crumrine P. A new, treatable source of recurrent meningitis: basioccipital meningocele. Pediatrics 1982; 70 (06) 941-943
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Martinez CR, Hemphill JM, Hodges III FJ. et al. Basioccipital meningocele. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1981; 2 (01) 100-102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Khairy S, Almubarak AO, Aloraidi A, Alahmadi KOA. Canalis basalis medianus with cerebrospinal fluid leak: rare presentation and literature review. Br J Neurosurg 2019; 33 (04) 432-433
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Pinilla-Arias D, Hinojosa J, Esparza J, Muñoz A. Recurrent meningitis and persistence of craniopharyngeal canal: case report. Neurocirugia (Astur) 2009; 20 (01) 50-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Abele TA, Salzman KL, Harnsberger HR, Glastonbury CM. Craniopharyngeal canal and its spectrum of pathology. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014; 35 (04) 772-777
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar