A Lateral Cephalometric Radiographic Analysis of Size and Shape of Sella Turcica: A Retrospective Observational Study

PDF

Published: 2023-05-17

DOI: 10.56557/upjoz/2023/v44i83484

Page: 75-85


Suvarna Lakshmi Madamala *

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, India.

Tatapudi Ramesh

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, India.

Reddy Sudhakara Reddy

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, India.

Koneru Jyothirmai

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, India.

Anand Babu Beeraboyina

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Vishnu Dental College, Bhimavaram, India.

Swathi Gadadasu

Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, Anil Neerukonda Institute of Dental Sciences, Bheemunipatnam, India.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Objectives: To assess shape and size of Sella turcica on lateral cephalographs, and to find association of age and gender with shape and size of sella turcica.

Methods: Lateral cephalographs of 434 healthy subjects (254 females and 180 males) in the age group of 8-30 years were included in the study. Linear dimensions of sella turcica (length, depth, diameter) were measured and different shapes of sella (Normal, oblique anterior wall, bridging, double contour of floor, irregular dorsum, pyramidal) were analyzed. Student’s t-test to calculate mean differences in linear dimensions with age and gender. Frequency distribution of shape analyzed through chi-square test. Inter and intra observer variability assessed through paired t- test.

Results: Normal shape of sella turcica was most common shape (52.5%). Linear dimensions were increased with age (p>0.05) and except for diameter, length and depth were greater in males compared to females (p>0.05). When intra and inter observer variability was assessed, high significant values obtained with respect to depth (p=0.000). 

Conclusion: This study concluded that regardless of age and gender, normal shape of sella turcica (52.5%) was most common shape followed by sella turcica bridging (21.9%). Mean linear dimensions of sella turcica increased with age. Length and depth dimensions were larger in males comparative to females. This study provides baseline data for further research and clinical practice in fields of forensic medicine and epidemiology.

Keywords: Sella, Sella Turcica, shape, size, lateral cephalograph


How to Cite

Madamala, S. L., Ramesh , T., Reddy , R. S., Jyothirmai , K., Beeraboyina, A. B., & Gadadasu , S. (2023). A Lateral Cephalometric Radiographic Analysis of Size and Shape of Sella Turcica: A Retrospective Observational Study. UTTAR PRADESH JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY, 44(8), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.56557/upjoz/2023/v44i83484

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

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;29:457-63.

Muhammed FK, Abdullah AO, Rashid ZJ. et al. Morphology, the incidence of bridging, and dimensions of sella turcica in different racial groups. Oral Radiol 2019; 35:127–134.

Sathyanarayana HP, Kailasam V, Chitharanjan AB. The Size and Morphology of Sella Turcica in Different Skeletal Patterns among South Indian Population: A Lateral Cephalometric Study. J Ind Orthod Soc. 2013;47(4): 266-271.

Isadorxe Meschan. An Atlas of Anatomy Basic to Radiology; WB Saunders, Philadelphia, 1975: 343 – 348,.

Snell RS. The head and neck. Clinical Anatomy by Regions. 8th ed. New York; Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. 2008:667-850.

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;26:597-604.

Silverman FN. Roentgen standards for size of the pituitary fossa from infancy through adolescence. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1957;78:451-460.

Kisling E. Cranial morphology in Down’s syndrome. A comparative roentgencephalometric study in adult males Thesis, Munksgaard, Copenhagen; 1966.

Kjaer I, Wagner A, Madsen P, Blichfeldt S, Ramussen K, Russell B. The sella turcica in children with lumbosacral myelomeningocele. Eur J Orthod. 1998c;20:443–48.

Kjaer I, Fischer-Hansen B. The adenohypophysis and the cranial bkase in early human development. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol. 1995a;15: 157–161.

Kjaer I, Keeling JW, Fischer-Hansen B, Becktor KB. Midline skeletodental morphology in holoprosencephaly. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2002;39:357–363.

Axelsson S, Storhaug K, Kjaer I. Post-natal size and morphology of the sella turcica in Williams syndrome. Eur J Orthod. 2004; 6:613–21.

Alkofide EA. Sella turcica morphology and dimensions in cleft subjects. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2008;45:647-53.

Shah AM, Bashir U, Ilyas T. The shape and size of the sella turcica in skeletal Class I, II & III in patients presenting at Islamic International Dental Hospital, Islamabad. Pak Oral Dent J 2011;31:104-10.

Chauhan P, Kalra S, Mongia SM, Ali S, Anurag A. Morphometric analysis of sella turcica in North Indian population: A radiological study. Int J Res Med Sci 2014;2:521-6.

Nagaraj T, Shruthi R, James L, Keerthi I, Balraj L, Goswami RD. The size and morphology of sella turcica: A lateral cephalometric study. JMed Radiol Pathol Surg. 2015;1:3-7.

Konwar SK, Singhla A, Bayan R. Morphological (Length, Depth, and Diameter) Study of Sella Turcica in Different Mandibular Growth Patterns in Indians. Int J Dent Med Spec 2016;3(3) :4-9

Shrestha GK, Pokharel PR, Gyawali R, Bhattarai B, Giri J. The morphology and bridging of the sella turcica in adult orthodontic patients. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18:45.

Motwani MB, Biranjan R, Dhole A, Choudhary AB,l Mohite A. A study to evaluate the shape and size of sella turcica and its correlation with the type of malocclusion on lateral cephalometric radiographs. IOSR J. Dent. Med. Sci. 2017;16:126–132.

Sinha S, Shetty A, Nayak K. The morphology of Sella Turcica in individuals with different skeletal malocclusions – A cephalometric study. Translational Research in Anatomy. 2020;18:100054.

Arthisri AS, Dhanapriya S, Niranjana A, Mehazabin S, Massillamani F, Kailasam S. Evaluation of anatomical variations of Sella Turcica with age and gender using Digital Lateral Cephalogram in Chennai City. Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology. 2021;33(3): 280.

Surana MP, Bhagawati BT, Kumar N, Jaral S, Kumar ABS. Radio-morphometric analysis of Sella Turcica in relation to age and gender in Sri Ganganagar population: A prospective cephalometric study. Cureus. 2022;14(11):e32048.

Gordon M B , Bell A L A roentgenographic study of the sella turcica in normal children .New York State Journal of Medicine 1922;22:54–59.

Camp JD. Normal and pathological anatomy of the sella turcica as revealed by roentgenograms. Am J Roentgenol 1924;12:143-56.

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 Dentofac Orthop. 1999;116: 572-7.

Arcos-Palomino, I. Ustrell-Torrent, J.M. Association between sella turcica bridging and altered direction of dental eruption: A case-control study. J. Clin. Exp. Dent. 2019;11:e913–20.

Alqahtani, H. Association between sella turcica bridging and congenitally missing maxillary lateral incisors. J. Dent. Sci. 2020;15:59–64.

Jankowski T, Jedli´nski M, Grocholewicz K, Janiszewska Olszowska J. Sella turcica morphology on cephalometric radiographs and dental abnormalities—Is there any association?—Systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18: 4456.

Kjær I, Wagner A, Madsen P, Blichfeldt S, Rasmussen K, Russell B. The sella turcica in children with lumbosacral myelomeningocele. Euro J Orthodont. 1998;20:443-8

Quakinine GE, Hardy J. Microsurgical anatomy of the pituitary gland and the sellar region: the pituitary gland. Am Surg. 1987;53:285-90.

Choi WJ, Hwang EH, Lee SR. The study of shape and size of normal sella turcica in cephalometric radiographs. Korean Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Radiology. 2001; 31:43–49.