MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.2298/sarh1012764n

Медицинская библиотека · Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo · 2010

[Interparietal bone in forensic practice: case report].

Nikolić Slobodan, Zivkovic Vladimir, Juković Fehim

Клинический случайАннотация на английскомСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

In forensic autopsy, pathologists pay attention to skull fracture lines. They are not much interested in the anatomical morphological variations of the skull bones, as long as the variations are not present. The interparietal bone is one of the anatomical variations that could be of interest for forensic pathologists.

CASE OUTLINE: We present a case of a 54-year-old man who, after a fall overlived a head injury for six weeks. By chance, autopsy revealed an undivided interparietal bone. Its lateral sutures were fused with parietal bones and unrecognizable from the anterior skull bones, while the sutura mendosa was clearly visible.

CONCLUSION

The forensic pathologist should be able to recognize anatomic morphological variations, including those of skull bones. The interparietal bone could be interpreted wrongly as belonging to the fractured occipital bone, i.e. as a broken fragment. This is of particular significance in the cases, for example, of murder or child abuse. Its inferior suture can be seen by X-ray and possibly wrongly interpreted as a fracture line. The presence of this variation may be occasionally useful in the identification of an unknown or lost person.

Для цитирования: Nikolić Slobodan, Zivkovic Vladimir, Juković Fehim. [Interparietal bone in forensic practice: case report].. Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo. 2010. DOI: 10.2298/sarh1012764n.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.