Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 34196

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : June | Volume : 17 | Issue : 6 | Page : AC15 - AC20 Full Version

Morphometric Analysis of Age and Gender-related Variations of Corpus Callosum by using Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: June 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/63555.18078
Navbir Pasricha, Eti Sthapak, Ashish Thapar, Rajan Bhatnagar

1. Additional Professor, Department of Anatomy, Dr. RML Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, Dr. RML Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 3. MBBS Student, Dr. RML Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 4. Professor and Head, Department of Anatomy, Dr. RML Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Navbir Pasricha,
705, Faculty Apartments, Dr. RMLIMS, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Next to Indian Oil Building, Lucknow-226010, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: nivibedi@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: The Corpus Callosum (CC) is the largest commissural bundle connecting the two cerebral hemispheres which is involved in learning, memory, thinking, three-dimensional visual ability, executive functions as well as behavioural patterns. Exact morphometric dimensions are a prerequisite before surgical interventions and stereotactic approaches to the foramen of Munro and also in cases of callosectomy for intractable epilepsy as inconsistencies exist regarding gender and age related changes of CC. Also, most published studies are from the western world and very few studies are from South-east Asia and India.

Aim: To study the morphometry of CC and possible age, gender related variations using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) in the North Indian population.

Materials and Methods: An observational, cross-sectional study was done in Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India from January 2019 to October 2019. A total of 200 head MRI scans, using PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication System) System Viewer software were evaluated. In all the scans, length, height, minimum and maximum thickness of CC were studied. The data were statistically analysed using STATA Software for age and gender-related differences. Student’s t-test, one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), linear regression and Pearson correlation coefficient were applied.

Results: The study showed decrease in thickness of body, rostrum and splenium with age, linked to generalised degeneration of cortical neurons or atrophy of white matter with advancing age. Also, there was increase in length with age, possibly due to age mediated structural dilatation in lateral ventricles. Statistically significant sexual dimorphism was observed as a larger CC length in males (74.24±4.26 mm) than females (72.67±4.16 mm) (p-value <0.001) and larger brain length in males (171.75±5.51 mm) as compared to females (163.70±5.75 mm) (p-value <0.001). Males also showed greater splenial thickness (10.15±1.79 mm) in comparison to females (9.68±1.51 mm) (p-value <0.001) which may represent the importance of distribution of fibres of visual cortex in males due to larger occipital lobe.

Conclusion: The present study documented morphometry of normal CC in different gender and age groups and observed sexual dimorphism, especially greater CC length and splenial thickness in males than females. With age increase in the length and decrease in thickness of CC was seen.

Keywords

Ageing, Atrophy, Brain, Cognition, Commissural bundle

The morphometric analysis of physiologic variations in CC morphology is important. These variations may cause problems in diagnosis and treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, dysmyelinating and demyelinating disorders, pre-and perinatal trauma, or hypoxic injury (1),(2),(3). The CC forms a massive arched inter-hemispheric bridge in the floor of the median longitudinal cerebral fissure which connects cortical as well as subcortical regions of the right and left-sides of the brain and plays an essential role in the integration of information between the two hemispheres. The human CC has been divided anterio-posteriorly into four main parts, including the genu, the rostrum, the body or trunk, which is frequently subdivided into anterior, middle, posterior, and the splenium. Variations in morphology of CC have been quoted in a wide range of neuropsychiatric disorders (4),(5).

Neurologists and anatomists have debated and researched on morphometry of CC and the association of the variations with intelligence and comprehension. Researchers have shown that it is involved in many advanced features of the brain, such as learning, memory, thinking, three-dimensional visual ability, executive functions as well as behavioural patterns (6),(7).

Interestingly, such results point out towards possible relation between morphometry of CC with the difference in cognition and behavioural pattern seen in males and females. Hence, sexual dimorphism of CC became an emerging topic of interest among the scientific communities. Despite the earlier work done on CC and its relationship with gender, there is no unanimity in literature concerning the same. Many studies have found significant sex differences in the length, shape and area of the CC of males and females; with males having larger gross dimensions (8),(9),(10),(11),(12).

Such results are again reasoned with contradictory studies, one attributing the apparent callosal dimorphism to individual difference in brain size (13),(14) while the other concluded that the observed results in callosal anthropometric measurements are real and would remain significant even after adjusting for the main proposed confounders, including brain size (15). However, there are several reports where no sex related differences in the size and various other measurements of CC have been reported (16),(17),(18). Inconsistencies also lie regarding age related changes of CC. Hence, despite rigorous investigations on gender-related variations of CC, much controversy still exists in the literature.

In surgical interventions and stereotactic approaches to the foramen of Monro or third ventricle and callosectomy for intractable epilepsy, MRI especially T1 weighted images, are required as a preoperative measure for determination of the extent of callosectomy as well as for postoperative evaluation. Past studies have taken lesser morphometric parameters, insufficient sample size or in some cases, diseased subjects without their proper medical history, which have led to disparities in results. Also, most published studies investigated gender and age related CC variations in the western countries and few studies addressed it in any Southeast Asian country like India (18),(19),(20). In view of the importance of the dimensions of CC, present study aimed to address these issues to study the morphometry of CC and possible age, gender-related variations using MRI in the North Indian population.

Material and Methods

An observational, cross-sectional study was done in Department of Anatomy, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, a Multispecialty referral Institute in Uttar Pradesh, India from January 2019 to October 2019. Prior clearance was taken from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC No.96/18 Date 03/05/19) and for using data from Institutional PACS System, approval with waiver of consent was accorded.

Inclusion criteria: Head MRI scans of 200 individuals (109 males and 91 females), aged between 20-80 years, who were referred to the institute for head MRIs and were reported to have normal images by the Radiologist, were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Scans with pathological findings like tumours, infections, trauma, hydrocephalus, demyelinating lesions, and congenital anomalies and those younger than 20 and older than 80 years were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: Since this was an Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) Short Term Studentship (STS) project with data collection over a period of two months, convenience sampling method was used to take a sample size of 200 subjects.

Study Procedure

Demographic data such as age, gender were collected for all the individuals. PACS System Viewer software was used to measure and record the dimensions by a single observer. Given parameters (21) were measured with abbreviations as shown in (Table/Fig 1).

MRI images of the following are shown in [Table/Fig-2-4]. The subject scans selected were further divided into age groups of 20-39 years, 40-59 years and 60-80 years. All measurements were taken in the mid-sagittal plane using method described by Mitchell TN et al., by determining mid points of posterior and anterior commissure (22). T1 weighted MRI images obtained from GE Healthcare 3.0T MRI scanners were manually studied on the SYNAPSE PACS viewer software available with the institute.

Statistical Analysis

The data were statistically analysed for age and gender-related differences and checked for correlation by STATA Software (STATA Inc.). Student’s t-test, one-way ANOVA, linear regression and Pearson correlation coefficient were used to analyse the data. The p-value <0.05 were considered significant.

Results

The study analysed MRI scans of 200 subjects (109 males and 91 females) with mean age 49.05±19.7 years, ranging from 20-80 years. The average CC length (CL) was found to be 73.53±4.28 mm (95% CI-62.92-82.53), while CC thickness at midpoint (CT mid) was 4.41±1.08 mm (95% CI-2.28-6.59) and CC height (CH) was 24.87±2.86 mm (95% CI-19.4-32.59) (Table/Fig 5).

The study observed statistically significant sexual dimorphism with a larger CC Length (CL) and Brain length (BL1, BL2) in males as compared to females. The difference in CC length and Splenial thickness (Ts) among males and females was statistically significant. The mean value of Tbmax, MP b, MA b and GA were also higher among males but the difference was not found significant (Table/Fig 6).

In present study, it was observed that there was decrease in thickness of Body (CTmid), Rostrum (Tr) and Splenium (Ts) with age which may be linked to generalised degeneration of cortical neurons or atrophy of white matter with advancing age. Present study also observed increase in length of CC (CL) with age, possibly due to age mediated structural dilatation in lateral ventricles and its association with CC (Table/Fig 7).

Linear correlation between morphometric brain measurements and age measured over a continuous scale is depicted in (Table/Fig 8),(Table/Fig 9).

Morphometric brain measurements Tr, Ts, Tb max, Tb min, MA b, MP b had statistically significant (p<0.001) negative correlation with age; while CT had a non significant negative correlation. Morphometric brain measurements BL, CL, CA, GA had a statistically significant positive correlation with age; while CH, CP, FC, OC had a non significant positive correlation with age.

(Table/Fig 10) depicts the unadjusted and gender adjusted coefficient obtained by linear regression of morphometric brain measurements with age. BL, shows the highest increase with increasing age (0.157 mm with each year increase in age) and Ts shows the maximum decrease with increasing age (-0.051 mm with each year increase in age). The gender adjustment of coefficient did not have any effect over the statistical significance.

Discussion

Normal shape, size and topographic location of CC has been well worked upon by researchers like Anagnostopoulou S et al., and these studies have been mostly done on formalin fixed preserved brains (17). Only a few MRI studies (23),(24),(25),(26) have been documented to study normal morphometry in different populations as shown in (Table/Fig 11).

Investigations of sex differences in CC size have yielded mixed results. One of the initial studies to document sexual dimorphism was conducted by Bean RB in American population who suggested that “exceptional size of the CC may mean exceptional intellectual activity” to account for measurable differences between men and women (18). DeLacoste-Utamsing C and Holloway RL concluded by measurements of cross-sectional area of CC in 14 postmortem brains (5 females and 9 males) that on an average, “relative to brain size,” the CC mid-sagittal area (CCA) in females may be larger than in males (8). Their results were reviewed in another autopsy data which also stated that “splenium, posterior section of CC, is more bulbous in women than men” (10).

Oka S et al., from a study in Japanese population also supported by correlating callosal morphometry with dimorphism of brain length for both the genders (27). Contrarily, reviews done by George BA et al., and Bishop KM and Wahlsten D concluded that there is no evidence suggesting a significant sex difference in the size of the CC at all (28),(29). A recent study by Abdolmaleki A et al., in Iranian population found apparently larger callosal dimensions in male participants but also provided evidence regarding the confounding effect of brain volume on the observed sexual dimorphism (15). Hence, a concluding perspective for the given variations could be that “smaller brains may have relatively larger CC regardless of gender” and since average brain size in females is smaller than in males, the observations may be accounted for by comparison of groups with different average brain sizes and not due to gender. Studies done by Peter M and Jäncke L et al., in German population, McLeod NA et al., in American population, Bermudez P and Zatorre RJ in Canadian population and Bruner E et al., on Spanish population, justify that any observed difference between groups is not gender specific but may be due to differences in brain size (30),(31),(32),(33),(34). Study by Tepest R et al., has employed a variety of methodologies for measurement and normalisation due to confounding factors but have yielded disparate results (35).

The present study observed statistically significant sexual dimorphism with a larger CC length and brain length in males as compared to females. A longer CC in males is also reported earlier in the following studies (16),(17),(36),(37),(38),(39),(40),(41),(42). However, even after adjusting for brain length using covariate, regression and ratio analysis on a subset of men and women with matched intracranial size, Sullivan EV et al., in American population observed larger size of CC in male subjects (40). Hence, this information could not be a simple artefact and might have biological significance regarding the connectivity differences in male and female brains. The present study also found that females had lesser thickness of splenium as compared to males, which may be accounted for by the fact that in males, the occipital lobe is larger with more number of fibres from visual cortex contributing to a thicker splenium in males. Previous studies try to conclude greater splenial width in females but fall short of evidence to support the presence of sex related differences in size of splenium, either in absolute size or irrespective of difference in the overall brain size in two sexes (8),(9),(10),(11),(29). This result was also in contrast to the findings where no such gender related difference in splenium was found in Indian studies (19),(20),(39). Other than this CA, CP, FC and OC were found to be greater in males signifying their greater brain size. Studies done by Peters M, Smith RJ and Byne W et al., have noted considerable variation in size and shape of CC among individuals and have advocated using a large sample size to demonstrate a significant gender difference which has been addressed in the present study (30),(36),(41).

Takeda S et al., worked on determination of indices of CC associated with normal ageing in Japanese individuals (37). Similar study by Gupta E et al., found chronological decrease in width of genu and rostrum in Indian females specifically (38). The result of length and width of CC of present study are comparable with findings from other population (8),(9),(10),(11),(12) and in concordance with Indian studies (19),(20), that is decrease in thickness of body, rostrum and splenium with age linked to generalised degeneration of cortical neurons or atrophy of white matter with advancing age. Also, contrary to general belief that CC shrinks with age this study found an increase in length of CC with age, possibly due to age mediated structural dilatation in lateral ventricles. As depicted in (Table/Fig 12), this finding was comparable with result of many studies on this topic (20),(23),(25) but was in contrast with studies which justify decreases in CC length simultaneously (42),(43). Present study found increase in height of CC as reported by Takeda S et al., (37).

On adjusting for gender, value of beta coefficient for callosal length decreases, which signifies that age related changes are more rapid in males than females causing earlier decline in dichotic listening and binaural processing skill in males, which is also suggested by Witelson SF and Cowell PE et al., (12),(43). Except the decrease in CC length, seen more significantly in males with ageing, the present study did not find any sexual difference in the pattern of ageing of CC.

Limitation(s)

Present study was a cross-sectional study without any direct comparison between subjects. Ideally, a longitudinal study over several decades should be performed, comparing change in morphometry with age in the same subjects.

Conclusion

On analysing the morphometry of normal CC, sexual dimorphism, especially greater CC length and splenial thickness was observed in males than females. In changes with respect to age, the study found increase in the length and decrease in thickness of CC in the older age group. Significant decrease in thickness of body, rostrum and splenium with age was observed which could be linked to generalised degeneration of cortical neurons or atrophy of white matter with advancing age. The morphometric data obtained from present study can aid the clinicians with diagnosis of presence and progression of disease involving the CC.

References

1.
Walterfang M, Velakoulis D. Callosal morphology in schizophrenia: What can shape tell us about function and illness? Br J Psychiatry. 2014;204:09-11. Doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.132357. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Bachman AH, Lee SH, Sidtis JJ, Ardekani BA. Corpus callosum shape and size changes in early Alzheimer’s disease: A longitudinal MRI study using the OASIS brain database. J Alzheimers Dis. 2014;39:71-78. Doi: 10.3233/JAD-131526. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Hutchinson AD, Mathias JL, Banich MT. Corpus callosum morphology in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analytic review. Neuropsychology. 2008;22:341-49. Doi: 10.1037/08944105.22.3.341. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Duff BJ, Macritchie KA, Moorhead TW. Human brain imaging studies of DISC1 in schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression: A systematic review. Schizophr Res. 2013;147:1-13. Doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2013.03.015. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Bellani M, Calderoni S, Muratori F, Brambilla P. Brain anatomy of autism spectrum disorders I. Focus on corpus callosum. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2013;22:217-21. Doi: 10.1017/s2045796013000139. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Verger K, Junque C, Levin HS. Correlation of atrophy measures on MRI with neuropsychological sequelae in children and adolescents with traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj. 2001;15:211-21. Doi: 10.1080/02699050010004059. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Caille S, Sauerwein HC, Schiavetto A. Sensory and motor interhemispheric integration after section of different portions of the anterior corpus callosum in nonepileptic patients. Neurosurgery. 2005;57:50-59. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
DeLacoste-Utamsing C, Holloway RL. Sexual dimorphism in the human corpus callosum. Science. 1982;216:1431-32. Doi: 10.1126/science.7089533. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Allen LS, Richey MF, Chai YM, Gorski RA. Sex differences in the corpus callosum of the living human being. J Neurosci. 1991;11:933-42. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Holloway RL, Anderson PJ, Defendini R, Harper C. Sexual dimorphism of the human corpus callosum from three independent samples: Relative size of the corpus callosum. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1993;92:481-98. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Davatzikos C, Resnick SM. Sex difference in anatomic measures of interhemispheric connectivity: Correlations with cognition in women but not men. Cereb Cortex. 1998;8:635-40. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Witelson SF. Hand and sex differences in the isthmus and genu of the human corpus callosum. A postmortem morphological study. Brain. 1989;112:799-835. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Luders E, Toga AW, Thompson PM. Why size matters: Differences in brain volume account for apparent sex differences in callosal anatomy: The sexual dimorphism of the corpus callosum. Neuroimage. 2014;84:820-24. Doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.040. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Luders E, Narr KL, Zaidel E. Gender effects on callosal thickness in scaled and unscaled space. Neuroreport. 2006;17:1103-06. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Abdolmaleki A, Mastery Farahani R, Ghoreishi SK. Magnetic resonance imaging-based morphometric assessment of sexual dimorphism of corpus callosum. Anatomical Sciences. 2016; 13:117-24.
16.
Going JJ, Dixson A. Morphometry of the adult human corpus callosum: Lack of sexual dimorphism. J Anat. 1990;171:163-67.
17.
Anagnostopoulou S, Mourgela S, Katritsis D. Morphometry of corpus callosum: An anatomical study. Neuroanatomy. 2006;5:20-23.
18.
Bean RB. Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain. Am J Anat. 1906;5:353-432. Doi: 10.1002/aja.1000050402. [crossref]
19.
Puthanveetil A, Balan RK. Morphometric analysis of corpus callosum-A study in cadaver and MRI. J Evid Based Med Healthc. 2017;4:3219-22. Doi: 10.18410/jebmh/2017/639. [crossref]
20.
Suganthy J, Raghuram L, Antonisamy B. Gender-and age-related differences in the morphology of the corpus callosum. Clin Anat. 2003;16:396-403. Doi: 10.1002/ca.10161. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Gupta T, Singh B, Kapoor K, Gupta M, Kochhar K. Age and sex related variations in corpus callosal morphology. Nepal Med Coll J. 2008;10(4):215-21.
22.
Mitchell TN, Free SL, Merschhemke M. Reliable callosal measurement: Population normative data confirm sex-related differences. Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24:410-18. Doi: 10.1086/427117. [crossref]
23.
Chuks A, Chukwuebuka CF, Mgbe EK, Efekemo AO, Onuh AO, Nnamani A, et al. MRI-based morphometric analysis of corpus callosum dimensions of adults in Southeast Nigeria. Libyan Journal of Medicine. 2023;18:1. Doi: 10.1080/19932820.2023.2188649. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Allouh MZ, Al Barbarawi MM, Ali HA, Mustafa AG, Alomari SO. Morphometric analysis of the corpus callosum according to age and sex in Middle Eastern Arabs: Racial comparisons and clinical correlations to autism spectrum disorder. Front Syst Neurosci. 2020;14:30. Doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2020.00030. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Arda KN, Akay S. The relationship between corpus callosum morphometric measurements and age/gender characteristics: A comprehensive MRI study. J Clin Imaging Sci. 2019;9(33):01-07. [crossref][PubMed]
26.
Junle Y, Youmin G, Yanjun G. A MRI quantitative study of corpus callosum in normal adults. J Med Coll PLA. 2008;23(6):346-51. [crossref]
27.
Oka S, Miyamoto O, Janjua NA. Re-evaluation of sexual dimorphism in human corpus callosum. Neuroreport. 1999;10:937-40. Doi: 10.1097/00001756-199904060-00008. [crossref][PubMed]
28.
George BA, Hesselink JR, Jernigan TL. MR imaging of the corpus callosum. AJR. 1993;160:949-55. Doi: 10.2214/ajr.160.5.8470609. [crossref][PubMed]
29.
Bishop KM, Wahlsten D. Sex differences in the human corpus callosum: Myth or reality? Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1997;21:581-601. Doi: 10.1016/s0149-7634(96)00049-8. [crossref][PubMed]
30.
Peters M. The size of the corpus callosum in males and females: Implications of a lack of allometry. Can J Psychol. 1988;42:313-24. Doi: 10.1037/h0084195. [crossref][PubMed]
31.
Jäncke L, Staiger JF, Schlaug G, Huang Y, Steinmetz H. The relationship between corpus callosum size and forebrain volume. Cereb Cortex. 1997;7:48-56. Doi: 10.1093/cercor/7.1.48. [crossref][PubMed]
32.
McLeod NA, Williams JP, Machen B, Lum GB. Normal and abnormal morphology of the corpus callosum. Neurology. 1987;37:1240-42. Doi: 10.1212/wnl.37.7.1240. [crossref][PubMed]
33.
Bermudez P, Zatorre RJ. Sexual dimorphism in the corpus callosum: Methodological considerations in MRI morphometry. Neuroimage. 2001;13:1121-30. Doi: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0772. [crossref][PubMed]
34.
Bruner E, de la Cuetara JM, Colom R, Martin-Loeches M. Gender-based differences in the shape of the human corpus callosum are associated with allometric variations. J Anat. 2012;220:417-21. Doi: 10.1111/j.1469- 7580.2012.01476.x. [crossref][PubMed]
35.
Tepest R, Jacobi E, Gawronski A. Corpus callosum size in adults with high-functioning autism and the relevance of gender. Psychiatry Res: Neuroimag. 2010;183:38-43. Doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2010.04.007. [crossref][PubMed]
36.
Smith RJ. Relative size versus controlling for size: interpretation of ratios in research on sexual dimorphism in the human corpus callosum. Curr Anthropol. 2005;46:249-73. [crossref]
37.
Takeda S, Hirashima Y, Ikeda H. Determination of indices of the corpus callosum associated with normal aging in Japanese individuals. Neuroradiology. 2003;45:513. Doi: 10.1007/s00234-003-1019-8. [crossref][PubMed]
38.
Gupta E, Lalwani R, Babu C, Aneja S. Age related changes of corpus callosum by MRI in females. The Internet J of Neurology. 2009;13:01-05. Doi: 10.5580/18a1. [crossref]
39.
Banka S, Jit I. Sexual dimorphism in the size of the corpus callosum. J Anat Soc India. 1996;45:77-85.
40.
Sullivan EV, Rosenbloom MJ, Desmond JE, Pfefferbaum A. Sex differences in corpus callosum size: Relationship to age and intracranial size. Neurobiology of Aging. 2001;22:603-11. Doi: 10.1016/s0197- 4580(01)00232-9. [crossref][PubMed]
41.
Byne W, Bleier R, Houston L. Variations in human corpus callosum do not predict gender: A study using magnetic resonance imaging. Behav Neurosci. 1988;102:222-27. Doi: 10.1037/0735-7044.102.2.222. [crossref][PubMed]
42.
Hopper KD, Patel S, Cann TS. The relationship of age, gender, handedness and sidedness to the size of the corpus callosum. Acad Radiol. 1994;1:243-48. Doi: 10.1016/s1076-6332(05)80723-8. [crossref][PubMed]
43.
Cowell PE, Allen LS, Zalatimo NS, Denenberg VH: A developmental study of sex and age interactions in the human corpus callosum. Dev Brain Res. 1992;66:187-92. Doi: 10.1016/0165-3806(92)90079-c.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/63555.18078

Date of Submission: Feb 17, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Apr 05, 2023
Date of Acceptance: May 27, 2023
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2023

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: This project was done as an awarded Indian Council of Medical Research Short Term Student Fellowship Presentation at a meeting: The project was presented at the 5th International Conference of Brain and Spine (held online due to the COVID-19 pandemic) held from 27th-28th July 2020.
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? No
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Feb 22, 2023
• Manual Googling: Apr 22, 2023
• iThenticate Software: May 18, 2023 (17%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 10

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com