A Study on Variations of Nutrient Foramen of Ulna in Saurashtra Region With Its Clinical Relevance

Abstract

Background: Nutrient foramen is an opening into shaft of Ulna which gives passage to the blood vessels of medullary cavity. The knowledge of nutrient foramen is important in surgical procedures like bone grafting and more recently in microsurgical vascularized bone transplantation.Objective: To determine the number, location and direction of nutrient foramen and whether the nutrient foramens obey the rule of ossification, that is directed away from the growing end of the bone or not.Method: The present study consisted of 150 (75 right and 75 left) dried ulna bones excluding any fracture or pathological abnormalities Number and direction of nutrient foramen was observed in each ulna. Location of nutrient foramen in relation with surfaces and zones of ulna was determined.Result: It has been observed that 96.67% of the ulna had a single nutrient foramen, 1.33% double foramen and 2% had no nutrient foramen. It was concluded that 90% of the nutrient foramina were present on the anterior surface, 5.33% on anterior border and 4.67% on interosseous border It was also concluded that most (62.67%) of the foramina present in the zone II followed by zone I (23.33%) then by zone III (14%). All foramina were directed toward the upper end of ulna. Conclusion:By knowing the number and location of the nutrient foramina in ulna would be useful in preventing intra-operative injury of nutrient artery during orthopedic, plastic and reconstructive surgery and will also be relevant in medico legal practice.

Analysis of the Nutrient Foramen in Human Dry Ulnae of Turkish Population: An Anatomical Study and Current Literature Review

“…In the present paper, 89.67% (139 ulnas) had a single NF, 1.94% (3 ulnas) had a double NF, and 8.39% (13) of ulnas had no NF. Our single NF results are closer to the results of Kumari et al (15) and the double NF results of this study are compatible with the findings of Chavda et al (14). Nevertheless, our results of the absence of NF are not consistent with the results of previous studies, and this inconsistency may be due to the difference in sample size and ethnicity.…”

“…Chavda et al ( 14) stated that 63.76% of NFs were in the middle third (type 2) of the ulna, 22.15% were in the upper third of the ulna and 14.09% were in the lower third of the bones. They also mentioned that the mean FI was 35.34% (14). Similar to the study of Ukoha et al ( 4), Azizi and Danish (1) indicated that most of the NF (80%) were located in the middle third, while the remaining (20%) were situated in the upper third of the ulna.…”

“…(14) showed that 96.67% of the ulna (145 ulnas) had a single nutrient foramen, 1.33% (2 ulnas) had a double foramen and 2% (3 ulnas) had no nutrient foramen. Additionally, in their study, Kumari et al(15) noted that 3% (3 ulnas) did not have NF, 92% (92 ulnas) had a single foramen and 5% (5 ulnas) had double NF.…”

An Investigation of the Nutrient Foramen in the Long Bones of the Upper and Lower Limbs in Turkish Population

“…In the ulna we examined, the most common anatomic location of the NF was the anterior surface, as in previous studies (20,(24)(25)(26). While there are studies indicating the NF in the anterior border and medial surface of the ulna, we did not encounter the NF in the anterior border and medial surface in our study (27)(28)(29).…”

“…Similar to the results in the literature, all of the NF in the ulna we examined in the present study were proximally directed. Furthermore, another study reported that it was directed distally and horizontally (20,(27)(28)(29).…”