Srpski arhiv za celokupno lekarstvo 2010 Volume 138, Issue 11-12, Pages: 764-767
https://doi.org/10.2298/SARH1012764N
Full text ( 238 KB)
Cited by
Interparietal bone in forensic practice: Case report
Nikolić Slobodan (Institut za sudsku medicinu, Medicinski fakultet, Beograd)
Živković Vladimir (Institut za sudsku medicinu, Medicinski fakultet, Beograd)
Juković Fehim (Zdravstveni centar, Novi Pazar)
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.
Keywords: interparietal bone, Inca bone, occipital bone, forensic pathology
More data about this article available through SCIndeks