İlhan Bahşi

Anatomy of spinal nerves in the first Turkish illustrated anatomy handwritten textbook

BTeşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan^ is the first handwritten anatomy textbook with illustrations written in Turkish in 17th century by Şemseddîn-i İtâḳî. BTeşrih^ has different meanings such as anatomy, skeleton, and cutting a corpse into pieces [1]. BTeşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbalei Feylesûfan ^ means dissection of the body and scholars’ birth knowledge [2]. Since this is the first handwritten textbook in Turkish, it has great importance in the development of medicine in Ottoman Empire. This book was written while Grand Vizier Recep Pasha was in power, and it was dedicated to the Sultan of that period, Murat the IVth [3, 4]. It is thought that the book was written in 1632 [4–7]. Şemseddîn-i İtâḳî was born in Shirvan (North Azerbaijan) in 1570s. Şemseddîn-i İtâḳî was interested in mathematics, philosophy, medicine, hadith, cannon law, logic, and astronomy [4, 7]. İtâḳî suffered hardships because of the wars and internal conflicts in Shirvan. He lost a lot of his family, and he had to leave Shirvan in 1604 when it was annexed by Persia [8]. After İtâḳî left his homeland, he travelled to several countries for a long time but he did not receive much appreciation [4, 8]. He arrived in Istanbul during the reign of Sultan Murad the IVth (1623–1640) and was introduced to Sadrazam (Grand Vizier) Recep Pasha. He was given the academic title BHaremeyn Payesi^ by the Grand Vizier. He published his book with the help of Recep Pasha. In the introduction of the book, İtâḳî acknowledges the contributions of the Grand Vizier [4, 7]. Not many textbooks about anatomy existed in the Islamic World and the Ottoman Empire until İtâḳî’s book [9]. In other medical textbooks, anatomy occupies only a few pages in different sections [4]. İtâḳî’s book is a pioneer in its area as it is written in Turkish, and it is supported with illustrations [4]. In addition to Turkish, the book contains mostly Arabic and rarely Persian terms as well [4, 6, 7]. Some editions of this book which was written in the 17th century were reprinted in the 18th century. Seven different editions are known today [4]. The book contains illustrations similar to Ahmed İbn Mansur’s (14th century) book called Teşrih-i Ebdan. Some of the content was quoted from Avicenna’s Canon Medicinae and İbn Nafis’s Şerh-i Teşrihül Kanun. In addition to these illustrations, illustrations from other European based works like Andreas Vesalius’s De Humani Corporis Fabrica also exist. Some of the illustrations were drawn by the author himself. These illustrations were drawn by the author himself usually depict the nervous system [3, 4, 6, 10]. The purpose of this study is to analyze the anatomy of the spinal nerves as stated in the book BTeşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan^ written in the Ottoman Period, to evaluate the knowledge level about spinal nerve anatomy in 17th century and compare that knowledge with current knowledge of anatomy. In this study, Şemseddîn-i İtâḳî’s illustrated anatomy book by Esin Kâhya which is the translation of BTeşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan^ from the Ottoman alphabet into the Latin alphabet was evaluated. All of the sections of the book, especially the sections about spinal nerves, were analyzed in detail. This information was compared to our current knowledge; thus, its accuracy was inspected. In the book, general information about the nervous system was provided in the anatomy of the nerves. Then, the cranial * İlhan Bahşi dr.ilhanbahsi@gmail.com

Life of Niels Stensen (1638-1686), who was the Pioneer Scientist and Great Neuroanatomist

Danish scientist, Niels Stensen was a prosperous anatomist and in addition to that a pioneer in the areas of paleontology, geology, mineralogy and bishop. With his studies on subjects of anatomy, neuroscience, paleontology, mineralogy and geology Niels Stensen has major scientific contributions despite the difficult circumstances until his death at very young age.

Contributions to our modern understanding of cranial nerves and brain: Friedrich Arnold (1803–1890)

The German anatomist Friedrich Arnold (Fig. 1) was born in Edenkoben in 1803 [1]. Friedrich Arnold studied medicine at the University of Heidelberg between 1821 and 1825, with elder brother Johann Wilhelm Arnold, who was 2 years older than himself [2, 3]. Arnold had received anatomy training from Friedrich Tiedemann and Vincenz Fohmann. On September 7, 1825, he became a medical doctor in Heidelberg [4]. In 1825, he was the first person to describe the otic ganglion in his doctoral thesis. In this respect, he earned a great reputation in the world of anatomy and had a position in the anatomy department of the university where he graduated [3]. A few years later, he was appointed as an associate professor here [4]. In 1826, Arnold and his brother visited the institutions of natural sciences and medicine in Paris and in the autumn that year was invited to Heidelberg as professor at the institution of anatomy that town. In 1834, he became an extraordinary professor here [2]. In 1835, he was invited to Zurich as a professor and director of anatomy institute. He worked in Zurich for 5 years [2]. Then, he worked at the University of Freiburg and University of Tübingen. After 17 years, he returned to Heidelberg in 1852 as a professor of anatomy and physiology [4]. He retired in Heidelberg, where his career began in 1873. Despite retirement, his desire for knowing was not over. His son, Julius Arnold, professor of pathology, continued to work with his groom, Carl Gegenbaur, who became his successor. Arnold died in Heidelberg on July 5, 1890, when he was 87 years old [3].

Life of Guido Guidi (Vidus Vidius), who named the Vidian canal

Guido Guidi (Latinized name Vidus Vidius) was an Italian anatomist and surgeon [1]. In the literature, much of the details regarding his life are lacking. He was born in Florence [2]. Different information is present about his date of birth in the literature: there are sources indicating that he was born in 1500 [3], 10 February 1508 [4], 1500/ 1509 [5], 1509 [2], and 10 February 1509 [1]. His mother (Costanza) was daughter of painter Domenico del Gh i r l a n d a j o who wo r k a s a n a pp r e n t i c e f o r Michelangelo [2, 4]. His father, Giuliano di Guido dei Guidi was a family of physicians [4]. He probably trained in medicine and surgery in a native city and soon after that earned reputation as a good capable surgeon and anatomist [3]. Since he finished medical school, he worked as a doctor in Rome and Florence [2]. In 1542, he went to Paris and he served as a physician of Francis I, king of France [3]. He named royal physician in Paris and he became the first professor at College Royal [4]. During the six years in France, he had made a good friendship with Benvenuto Cellini who was an Italian goldsmith, sculptor, draftsman, soldier, musician, and artist who also wrote a famous autobiography and poetry [3]. In 1547, after the death of Francis I, Guidi had to leave from Paris and returned to his hometown [4]. Here, he was appointed to Cosmo de Medici as a chief physician [3]. In 1548, he served to Department of Philosophy and Medicine in University of Pisa that he was appointed as a professor for twenty years [4]. Guidi died on 26 May 1569 in Pisa [3]. According to Thompson [3], Guido was one of the instructors of Andreas Vesalius. His works

Costanzo Varolio (1543–1575), who named the “pons”

Costanzo Varolio (sometimes spelled Constanzo Varolio) (latinised as Constantinus Varolius) (Fig. 1), son of Sebastiano Varolio, is a Renaissance neuroanatomist who lived in the sixteenth century. Varolio was an Italian citizen, born in 1543 in Bologna and died in Rome in 1575 [1–5]. Varolio studied philosophy at a local university and then graduated in 1567 with medical education at the University of Bologna (MD and PhD) [2, 6]. During his medical education, he took lessons from Julio Caesar Aranzio (1530–1589), who was a student of Andreas Vesalius (1514–1564) [3]. In 1569, he undertook the responsibility of teaching anatomy at the University of Bologna [6, 7]. In 1572, he went to Rome and it is thought that he lectured at Sapienza University. However, there is no record of this [4]. At the same time, he was the doctor of Pope Gregory XIII during this period. He died in Rome in 1575 [3, 4, 7]. His books

A sample of morphological eponym confusion: foramina of Stenson/Stensen

Morphological eponyms are structures named generally based on researchers who first defined formations, carrying their names. While a vast portion of morphological eponyms has been abandoned in time, some of these are still being used prevalently. Additionally, when the literature is reviewed, it may be seen that structures expressed by some eponyms differ. Moreover, spelling of eponyms may also vary in some aspects. An example of this case is: Foramina of Stenson/Stensen. The Danish scientist Niels Stensen (1638–1686) was born in Copenhagen. Stensen’s name has numerous alternate spellings. Even though he was born as Niels Stensen (sometimes spelled Steensen, Danish version), he prefer to use Nicolai Stenonis (academic and Latin name) while studying medicine. His name was spelled in different styles as Nicolaus Stenonis or Nicolas Sténon (French version), Niccolò Stenone (Italian version) and Nicolaus or Nicolas Steno (English version). Today, his name is known generally as Nicolaus or Nicolas Steno [6]. Niels Stensen described the lower opening of IC, known today as incisive foramen [1, 6]. As there are different ways of pronunciation of the name Niels Stensen, differences may be found in eponyms his name was given to. Incisive foramen is named as foramina of Stenson or foramina of Stensen. Additionally, as in examples of parotid duct (Stenon duct) and incisive foramen (foramina of Stenson/ Stensen), a person’s name may be used as an eponym in more than one structure [6]. Abandonment of prevalent usage of eponyms not only made learning easier, but also reduced the confusion in meaning. Furthermore, it may be seen that the upper opening of IC was not named in Terminologia Anatomica [3] and Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary [1], and this opening may be suitably named as nasopalatine foramen as it is between the nasal cavity and the palate. To the Editor,

Anatomy of cranial nerves in the first Turkish illustrated anatomy manuscript

Teşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan was the first Turkish illustrated anatomy manuscript written by Şemseddîn-i İtâḳî in the seventeenth century. Teşrih is an Arabic word which has various meanings such as dissection of corpse, autopsy, anatomy, and skeleton [1]. This manuscript, the first illustrated anatomy book of Ottoman Period, was written during the period of Sultan Murat IV, who was the sultan of that period [2, 3]. General opinion is that this manuscript was written in 1632 [4–7]. There are very few works which include information only about anatomy in the Ottoman Empire [7]. The information about anatomy was usually found in the other medical books as only a few pages in that period [3]. They are some of the important characteristics of the İtâḳî’s manuscript that anatomical terms are expressed in Turkish in that manuscript and the expression is supported by illustrations [6]. This manuscript has led anatomical terms to be made Turkish. In the manuscript, Turkish anatomical terms were written with generally Arabic and rarely Persian equivalents next to them [6, 7]. After a general part following the introduction part, the information was given, starting with bones, about the anatomy of internal organs, nerves, muscles, and vessels, respectively, in the manuscript. The information given about nerves follows the information given about bones differently from the recent point of view. There are original definitions about central and peripheral nervous systems. Firstly, cranial nerves and later spinal nerves were discussed and information was given about points of outlet and distribution regions in the explanations about the nerves [7–9]. Information presented in the manuscript was visualized by anatomical illustrations. Some parts of these illustrations resemble the illustrations in Teşrihü’l-Ebdan min e’t-Tıb by Mansur (fourteenth century) [2, 7]. Besides these illustrations, there are also some illustrations in the manuscript from various European resources including De Humani Corporis Fabrica by Andreas Vesalius. Furthermore, there are some illustrations mostly about nervous system which were drawn by the author himself [6, 7]. The aims of this study are to examine cranial nerves’ anatomy in the manuscript Teşrih-ül Ebdan ve Tercümânı Kıbale-i Feylesûfan written in the Ottoman Period and compare this information in that period with today’s knowledge.

The first Turkish illustrated surgical textbook ‘Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye’

The work named Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye which was written by Şerafettin Sabuncuoğlu (1385–1470?) is quite important for history of medicine [1]. Famous Turkish doctor Sabuncuoğlu (Fig. 1) served as a clinician, trainer, and researcher for 14 years in Amasya Darussifa [1–3]. Sabuncuoğlu wrote three books which are named as Terceme-i Akrabadin, Mücerrebname, and Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye [1, 2]. In Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye, he explained various diseases and also treatment of these diseases [2]. This book is known as first handwritten surgical book in the Turkish and the Islamic World which reflects knowledge and skills of doctors who lived in Anatolia [1, 4]. The book also depicts some of the treatment implemented by doctors with the help of drawing miniature [1, 4]. The example of this, a surgery procedure performed on the posterior head region, was depicted in Fig. 2 and cover fgure. Treatment process of a patient who had cold and was not treated with the drug was explained in the statement part of this miniature. In this treatment, the artery located between two external ear (occipital artery) was cut and some blood was shed (Fig. 2 and cover figure). Then, the ointment was applied on the cutted region to the avoid for inflammation on the surgery site and wound site was closed [1]. In Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye, there are pictures of instruments which are used as treatment. These miniature and pictures of instruments were evaluated on many publications [1–3, 5–7], and this situation shows how valuable the book is. Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye was written in Turkish language with the use of Arabic alphabets [1, 2]. Written in Turkish is one of the important features of the book. Three different editions are known nowadays. Two of the books are in Istanbul (in Fatih Millet Library and in Library of Medicine History Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of İstanbul) and one of them is in Paris (Bibliothe′que Nationale) [1, 8]. The book has been introduced again in the beginning of the twentieth century to the world of science. Although this information shows variety in different articles, the first introducer was Ali Canip by the writing in the journal of Hayat Mecmuası in 1927 [1, 2, 9]. It is known that Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye substantially similar to the book called et-Tasrif which was written by Arap author Zehravi lived in tenth century [2]. Uzel pointed out that there were 137 differences between these two books [1]. In Cerrahiyetü’l-Haniyye, there are general surgery, pediatric surgery, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, thoracic surgery, urology, obstetrics and gynecology sections [1, 2, 5–13]. Keskinbora [4] reported that although it has beenmore than 550 years, some part of the methods are still using. Explaining diseases and treatments by the help of figure and miniature and also his efforts of transferring this information to doctors show that Şeraffettin Sabuncuoğlu and his works have an important place in history of medicine. * İlhan Bahşi dr.ilhanbahsi@gmail.com

Morphometric evaluation and surgical implications of the infraorbital groove, canal and foramen on cone-beam computed tomography and review of literature

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study is to evaluate the anatomy, morphometry, and variations of infraorbital groove (IOG), infraorbital canal (IOC) and infraorbital foramen (IOF) on the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and to investigate their relations with surrounding structures. METHODS IOG, IOC and IOF were evaluated retrospectively in CBCT images of 75 female (F) and 75 male (M) cases with a range of 18-65 years (F: 37.62 ± ± 13.55, M: 37.53 ± 15.87) by Planmeca Romexis programme. IOG, IOC and IOF were examined bilaterally (300 sides) in the cases. The 13 parameters were measured on these images in axial, sagittal and coronal planes. RESULTS There was a very weak positive correlation between the age and the angle between IOC and IOG (p = 0.015, r = 0.198), there was a weak positive correlation between the age and skin thickness (p = 0.001, r = 0.281), and there was no correlation between the age and other parameters. A total of 21 (7%) IOCs were detected in maxillary sinus, bilaterally in 6 cases and unilaterally in 9 cases (5 on the left, 4 on the right). In 1 case, bilaterally, IOC was separated 2 canals while running anteriorly in the maxillary sinus. The larger one was directed to IOF in its normal course and the smaller one was directed to lateral wall of nasal cavity and opened to the inferior nasal meatus in front of the opening of nasolacrimal duct. CONCLUSIONS We suggest that the parameters found in the present study may facilitate prediction of the location of the infraorbital nerve. Knowledge of this exact position in relation to easily measurable parameters may decrease the risk of infraorbital nerve injury during surgical approaches directed to this region and might serve as a guide during local anaesthetic interventions for dentistry, ophthalmology, plastic surgery, rhinology, neurosurgery and dermatology.