Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- no (14)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (14)
Keywords
- nasal breathing (2)
- statistical shape model (2)
- diANA (1)
- inferior turbinate (1)
- isthmus nasi (1)
- nasal airflow (1)
- nasal airflow simulation (1)
- nasal cavity (1)
- nasal obstruction (1)
- rhinorespiratory homeostasis (1)
Institute
The elephant trunk operates as a muscular hydrostat and is actuated by the most complex musculature known in animals. Because the number of trunk muscles is unclear, we performed dense reconstructions of trunk muscle fascicles, elementary muscle units, from microCT scans of an Asian baby elephant trunk. Muscle architecture changes markedly across the trunk. Trunk tip and finger consist of about 8,000 extraordinarily filigree fascicles. The dexterous finger consists exclusively of microscopic radial fascicles pointing to a role of muscle miniaturization in elephant dexterity. Radial fascicles also predominate (at 82% volume) the remainder of the trunk tip and we wonder if radial muscle fascicles are of particular significance for fine motor control of the dexterous trunk tip. By volume, trunk-shaft muscles comprise one-third of the numerous, small radial muscle fascicles, two-thirds of the three subtypes of large longitudinal fascicles (dorsal longitudinals, ventral outer obliques, and ventral inner obliques), and a small fraction of transversal fascicles. Shaft musculature is laterally, but not radially, symmetric. A predominance of dorsal over ventral radial muscles and of ventral over dorsal longitudinal muscles may result in a larger ability of the shaft to extend dorsally than ventrally and to bend inward rather than outward. There are around 90,000 trunk muscle fascicles. While primate hand control is based on fine control of contraction by the convergence of many motor neurons on a small set of relatively large muscles, evolution of elephant grasping has led to thousands of microscopic fascicles, which probably outnumber facial motor neurons.
Elephants use their trunks, muscular hydrostats, to perform a plethora of tasks. Trunk tip morphology as well as grasping behavior differ between elephant species. While African savanna elephants (Loxodonta africana) use their dorsal and ventral finger for pinching movements, Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) prefer to wrap around objects with their one dorsal finger and ventral bulb trunk tip lip. Moreover, E. maximus can flip their ventral bulb backwards to clamp objects behind the trunk tip. Whether trunk tip musculature differs between elephant species and muscle architecture is reflected by preferred grasping behavior is, however, not clear. In this study, we performed dense muscle fascicle reconstruction of three L. africana and three E. maximus hemi-trunk tips using a combination of manual and automated segmentation of high-resolution microfocus tomography (microCT) scans. We distinguish three types of muscle fascicles: longitudinal (bending and shortening), radial (elongating) and transversal muscle fascicles (elongating). We found that trunk tips of L. africana consist to one third of longitudinal and two thirds radial/transversal muscle fascicles, likely aiding in their grasping behavior, while E. maximus trunk tips consist to two thirds of longitudinal and one third radial/transversal muscle fascicles, which is advantageous for their wrapping and backward clamping behavior.
Successful functional surgery on the nasal framework requires reliable and comprehensive diagnosis. In this regard, the authors introduce a new methodology: Digital Analysis of Nasal Airflow (diANA). It is based on computational fluid dynamics, a statistical shape model of the healthy nasal cavity and rhinologic expertise. diANA necessitates an anonymized tomographic dataset of the paranasal sinuses including the complete nasal cavity and, when available, clinical information. The principle of diANA is to compare the morphology and the respective airflow of an individual nose with those of a reference. This enablesmorphometric aberrations and consecutive flow field anomalies to localize and quantify within a patient’s nasal cavity. Finally, an elaborated expert opinion with instructive visualizations is provided. Using diANA might support surgeons in decision-making, avoiding unnecessary surgery, gaining more precision, and target-orientation for indicated operations.
Functional surgery on the nasal framework requires referential criteria to objectively assess nasal breathing for indication and follow-up. Thismotivated us to generate amean geometry of the nasal cavity based on a statistical shape model. In this study, the authors could demonstrate that the introduced nasal cavity’s mean geometry features characteristics of the inner shape and airflow, which are commonly observed in symptom-free subjects. Therefore, the mean geometry might serve as a reference-like model when one considers qualitative aspects. However, to facilitate quantitative considerations and statistical inference, further research is necessary. Additionally, the authorswere able to obtain details about the importance of the isthmus nasi and the inferior turbinate for the intranasal airstream.
This study’s objective was the generation of a standardized geometry of the healthy nasal cavity.
An average geometry of the healthy nasal cavity was generated using a statistical shape model based on 25 symptom-free subjects. Airflow within the average geometry and these geometries was calculated using fluid simulations. Integral measures of the nasal resistance, wall shear stresses (WSS) and velocities were calculated as well as cross-sectional areas (CSA). Furthermore, individual WSS and static pressure distributions were mapped onto the average geometry.
The average geometry featured an overall more regular shape that resulted in less resistance, reduced wall shear stresses and velocities compared to the median of the 25 geometries. Spatial distributions of WSS and pressure of average geometry agreed well compared to the average distributions of all individual geometries. The minimal CSA of the average geometry was larger than the median of all individual geometries (83.4 vs. 74.7 mm²).
The airflow observed within the average geometry of the healthy nasal cavity did not equal the average airflow of the individual geometries. While differences observed for integral measures were notable, the calculated values for the average geometry lay within the distributions of the individual parameters. Spatially resolved parameters differed less prominently.
