Septal aperture aetiology: still more questions than answers

• Autorzy: Myszka A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Many theories have been suggested in order to explain the aetiology of septal aperture. The influence of genes, the size and shape of ulna processes, joint laxity, bone robusticity, osteoarthritis, and osteoporosis has been discussed; however, the problem has not yet been solved. The aim of the study was to examine the correlations between musculoskeletal stress markers, humeral robusticity and septal aperture. Additionally, the frequency of septal aperture according to sex, age, and skeletal side had been analysed. The skeletal material had come from a medieval cemetery in Cedynia, Poland. Skeletons of 201 adults (102 males, 99 females) had been examined and septal aperture had been scored. Six muscle attachment sites of upper limb bones had been analysed. Humeral robusticity had been calculated by use of the humeral robusticity index. The frequency of septal aperture among the population from Cedynia is 7.5%. There are no differences in septal aperture prevalence between males and females, the skeletal sides or age groups. In the analysed material, males with less developed muscle markers of right upper bones proved a higher predictable rate in having septal aperture (R = –0.34). On the left bones and among females, the converse correlation had also been found, but it is not statistically significant. The correlation between septal aperture and humeral robusticity is converse, yet small and insignificant. These results can confirm the theory of joint laxity and suggest that stronger bones (heavier muscles, more robust bones) increase joint tightness, and therefore protect the humeral lamina from septal aperture formation. But this theory needs a further detailed analysis. (Folia Morphol 2015; 74, 2: 219–224)

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Folia Morphologica
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 74
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.219-224,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Myszka A.

• Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, Institute of Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Umultowska 89, 61-614 Poznan, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Alves Cardoso FA, Henderson CY (2010) Enthesopathy formation in the humerus: data from known age at-death and known occupation skeletal collection. Am J Phys Anthropol, 141: 550–560.
• 2. Benfer RA, McKern TW (1966) The correlation of bone robusticity with the perforation of the coronoid-olecranon septum in the humerus of man Am J Phys Anthropol, 24: 247–256.
• 3. Benfer RA, Tappen NC (1968) The occurrence of septal perforation of the humerus in the non-human primate species Am J Phys Anthropol, 29: 19–28.
• 4. Benjamin M, Kumai T. Milz S. Boszczyk BM, Boszczyk AA, Ralphs JR (2002) The skeletal attachment of tendon-tendon ‘entheses’. Comp Biochem Physiol, 133: 931–945.
• 5. Berget KA, Churchill SE (1994) Subsistence activity and humeral hypertrophy among Western Aleutian islanders Am J Phys Anthropol, 18: 55 [abstract].
• 6. Bridges PS (1997) The relationship between muscle markings and diaphyseal strength in prehistoric remains from west-central Illinois Am J Phys Anthropol, 24, 82 [abstract].
• 7. Buikstra JE, Ubelaker DH (1994) Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas Archeological Survey Research, 44.
• 8. De Wilde V, De Maeseneer M, Lenchik L, Van Roy P, Beeckman P, Osteaux M (2004) Normal osseous variants presenting as cystic or lucent areas on radiography and CT imaging: a pictorial overview. Eur J Radiol, 51: 77–84.
• 9. Diwan RK, Rani A, Rani A, Chopra J, Srivastava AK, Sharma PK, Verma RK, Pankaj AK (2013) Incidence of supratrochlear foramen of humerus in North Indian population. Biomed Res-India, 24/1: 142–145.
• 10. Eshed V, Gopher A, Galili E, Hershkovitz I (2004) Musculoskeletal stress markers in Natufian hunter-gatherers and Neolithic farmers in the Levant: the upper limb. Am J Phys Anthropol, 123: 303–315.
• 11. Ferembach D, Schwidetzky I, Stloukal M (1979) Empfehlungen für die alters- und Geschlechtsdiagnose am Skelett Homo, 30: 1–32.
• 12. Granville EV (1967) Perforation of the coronoid-olecranon septum humero-ulnar relationship in Netherlands and African populations Am J Phys Anthropol, 26: 85–92.
• 13. Hawkey DE, Merbs CF (1995) Activity-induced musculoskeletal stress markers (MSM) and subsistence strategy changes among ancient Hudson Bay Eskimo Int J Osteoarchaeol, 5: 324–338.
• 14. Henderson CY, Alves Cardoso FA (2013) Special issue entheseal changes and occupation: technical and theoretical advances and their application Int J Osteoarchaeol, 23: 127–134.
• 15. Kate BR, Budey PN (1970) A note on a septal apertures in the humerus in the humerus of Central Indians. Eastern Anthropologist, 33: 105–110.
• 16. Kennedy KAR (1998) Markers of occupational stress: conspectus and prognosis of research. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 8: 305–310.
• 17. Koyun N, Aydinlioğlu A, Gümrukcüoğlu FN (2011) Aperture in coronoi-olecranon septum: A radiological evaluation. Indian J Orthop, 45/5: 392–395.
• 18. Krishnamurthy A, Yelicharla AR, Takkalapalli A, Manishamappa V, Bovinndala B, Chandramohan M (2011) Supratrochlear foramen of humerus: a morphometric study. Int J Biol Med Res, 2/3: 829–831.
• 19. Mariotti V, Facchini F, Belcastro MG (2004) Enthesopathies — proposal of a standardized scoring method and applications. Coll Anthropol, 28: 145–159.
• 20. Martin R, Saller K (1957) Lehrbuch der Antropologie in Systematischer Darstellung mit Besonderer Berücksichtigung der Antropoloschen Methoden. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgard.
• 21. Mays S (2001) Effects of age and occupation on cortical bone in a group of 18th–19th century British men. Am J Phys Anthropol, 116: 34–44.
• 22. Mays S (2008) Septal aperture of the humerus in a mediaeval human skeletal population. Am J Phys Anthropol, 136: 432–440.
• 23. Mayuri J, Aparna T, Pradeep P, Smita M (2013) Anatomical study of supratrochlear foramen of humerus. J Res Med Den Sci, 1/2: 33–35.
• 24. Meier LN, Hunt DR (2006) Incidence of humeral septal aperture and its relation to population and sex. Am J Phys Anthropol, 42 (suppl.): 129.
• 25. Molnar P (2006) Tracing prehistoric activities: Musculoskeletal stress markers of a Stone-Age population on the island of Gotland in the Baltic Sea. Am J Phys Anthropol, 129: 12–23.
• 26. Myszka A, Piontek J (2011) Shape and size of the body vs. musculoskeletal stress markers. Anthropol Anzeiger, 68/2: 139–152.
• 27. Myszka A, Piontek J (2012) Variation of musculoskeletal stress markers in the medieval population from Cedynia (Poland): proposal of standardized scoring method application. Coll Anthropol, 36/3: 1009–1017.
• 28. Nayak SR, Das S., Krishnamurthy A, Prabhu LV, Potu BK (2009) Supratrochlear foramen of the humerus: an anatomico-radiological study with clinical implication. Upsala J Med Sci, 114: 90–94.
• 29. Ndou R, Smith P, Gemell R, Mohatla O (2013) The supratrochlear foramen of the humerus in a South African Dry Bone Sample. Clin Anat, 26: 870–874.
• 30. Niinimäki S (2011) What do muscle marker ruggedness scores actually tell us? Int J Osteoarchaeol, 21: 292–299.
• 31. Niinimäki S (2012) The relationship between musculoskeletal stress markers and biomechanical properties of the humeral diaphysis. Am J Phys Anthropol, 147: 618–628.
• 32. Papaloucas C, Papaloucas M, Stergiulas A (2011) Rare cases of humerus apertures in Greeks. Trends Med Res, 6/3: 178–183.
• 33. Paraskevas GK, Papaziogas B, Tzaveas A, Gliaglis G, Kitsoulis P, Natsis K (2010) The supratrochlear foramen of the humerus and its relation to the medullary canal: a potential surgical application. Med Sci Monit, 16/4: 119–123.
• 34. Patel SV, Sutaria LK, Nayak TV, Kanjiya DP, Patel BM, Aterkar SH (2013) Morphometric study of supratrochlear foramen of humerus. Int J Biomed Advance Research, 4/2: 89–92.
• 35. Raghavendra K, Reddy AK, Shirol VS, Dixit D, Desai SP (2014) Morphometric analysis of septal aperture in humerus. Int J Med Res Health Sci, 3/2: 269–272.
• 36. Robb JE (1998) The interpretation of skeletal muscle sites: a statistical approach. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 8: 363–377
• 37. Scheuer L, Black S (2000) The Upper Limb. In: Scheuer L, Black SM eds. Developmental Juvenile Osteology. Academic Press, London, UK, 277–278.
• 38. Silveira FBC, Junior VM, Fazan VPS (2007) Anthropometric evaluation of the humerus in the presence and absence of the septal foramen. Int J Morphol, 25: 158 (abstract).
• 39. Singhal S, Rao V (2007) Supratrochlear foramen of the humerus. Anat Sci Int, 82: 105–107.
• 40. Steen SL, Lane RW (1998) Evaluation of habitual activities among two Alaskan Eskimo populations based on musculoskeletal stress markers. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 8: 341–353.
• 41. Stirland AJ (1998) Musculoskeletal evidence of activity: problems of evaluation. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 8: 354–362.
• 42. Stock JT, Shaw CN (2007) Which measures of diaphyseal robusticity are robust? A comparison of external methods of quantifying the strength of long bone diaphysis to cross-sectional geometric properties. Am J Phys Anthropol, 134: 412–423.
• 43. Trotter M (1934) Septal apertures in humerus of American whites and Negroes American. Am J Phys Anthropol, 19: 213–227.
• 44. Villotte S, Castex D, Couallier V, Dutour O, Knüsel CJ, Henry-Gambier D (2010) Enthesopathies as occupational stress markers: evidence from the upper limbs. Am J Phys Anthropol, 142: 224–234.
• 45. Villotte S, Knüsel CJ (2013) Understanding entheseal changes: De nition and life course changes. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 23: 135–146.
• 46. Weiss E (2003) Understanding muscle markers: aggregation and construct validity. Am J Phys Anthropol, 121, 230–240.
• 47. Weiss E (2007) Muscle markers revisited: activity pattern reconstruction with controls in a Central California Amerind population. Am J Phys Anthropol, 133: 931–940.
• 48. Weiss E, Corona L, Schultz B (2012) Sex differences in musculoskeletal stress markers: problems with activity pattern reconstruction. Int J Osteoarchaeol, 22: 70–80.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5603/FM.2015.0034