Department of Anatomy, School of Health Sciences, Department of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 75 Mikras Asias Street, Athens, GR 11527, Greece.
Laboratory of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine-Pharmacy, Rouen-Normandy University, Rouen, France.
Surg Radiol Anat. 2023 Jan;45(1):43-53. doi: 10.1007/s00276-022-03051-1. Epub 2022 Dec 6.
To estimate the prevalence of the sphenoidal emissary foramina (SEF), and the effect of possible moderators on it.
A systematic online literature search was conducted. The pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals was estimated. Outlier and influential analyses were performed. The presence of small-study effect and publication bias were evaluated. Moderator analyses were executed to investigate the effect of the specimens' continent of origin, type of study (dried skull or imaging), probing for the evaluation of SEF patency (conduction and instruments used), side dominance (bilateral or unilateral), morphometric data [SEF diameter, distances SEF-Foramen ovale (FO) and SEF-Foramen spinosum (FS)], and the methodology used for the morphometric measurements (caliper, DICOM Viewer, and image analysis software) on the estimated prevalence.
In total, 6,460 subjects from 26 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall SEF prevalence was estimated as 38.1%. The heterogeneity was high and statistically significant. No indications of publication bias and small-study effect were identified. The conducted subgroup analyses did not yield statistically significant differences in the SEF prevalence between groups, except of the type of side dominance. Both results of the univariable and multivariable regression analyses showed the association of the unilateral dominance with a decrease in the reported SEF prevalence.
The identification of more unilateral than bilateral foramina in a given cohort is associated with a decrease in the reported crude SEF prevalence. Laterality-specific estimates should be established for a precisive estimation of the emissary foramina prevalence.
评估蝶骨导静脉孔(SEF)的发生率,并分析其可能的影响因素。
系统地进行了在线文献检索。使用 95%置信区间估计了合并发生率。进行了离群值和影响分析。评估了小样本效应和发表偏倚的存在。进行了调节分析,以研究标本来源大陆、研究类型(干颅骨或影像学)、评估 SEF 通畅性的探测(传导和使用的仪器)、侧优势(双侧或单侧)、形态计量学数据(SEF 直径、SEF-卵圆孔(FO)和 SEF-棘孔(FS)之间的距离)以及形态计量学测量方法(卡尺、DICOM 查看器和图像分析软件)对估计发生率的影响。
共纳入 26 项研究的 6460 名受试者进行荟萃分析。总体 SEF 发生率估计为 38.1%。异质性高且具有统计学意义。未发现发表偏倚和小样本效应的迹象。进行的亚组分析未显示 SEF 发生率在各亚组之间存在统计学差异,除了侧优势类型。单变量和多变量回归分析的结果均表明,单侧优势与报告的 SEF 发生率降低有关。
在特定队列中发现的单侧孔多于双侧孔与报告的原始 SEF 发生率降低有关。应该建立特定侧别的估计值,以精确估计导静脉孔的发生率。