Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The British Journal of Ophthalmology logoLink to The British Journal of Ophthalmology
. 1999 Mar;83(3):347–352. doi: 10.1136/bjo.83.3.347

Topographic anatomy of the eyelids, and the effects of sex and age

W A van den Bosch 1, I Leenders 1, P Mulder 1
PMCID: PMC1722965  PMID: 10365046

Abstract

AIMS—To describe the effects of sex and age on eyeball, eyelid, and eyebrow position.
METHODS—A cross sectional cohort study was performed in which both eyes of 320 normal subjects aged between 10 and 89 years were included. Of each 10 year age cohort, there were 20 men and 20 women. Frontal, as well as lateral, slides were taken of both eyes. On projected slides, a reference line through the medial canthi and vertical lines through the pupil centre and the lateral canthus were constructed. Using these lines, we measured the size of the horizontal eyelid fissure, the distance from the reference line to the pupil centre and to the lateral canthus, the distance between the pupil centre and the upper and lower eyelid margin, and the distance between the upper eyelid margin and the skin fold and eyebrow. On lateral slides, the distance between the lateral canthus and the anterior corneal surface was measured.
RESULTS—Between the ages of approximately 12 and 25 years, the horizontal eyelid fissure lengthened 3 mm, while the position of other eyelid structures remained virtually unchanged. Between the average ages of 35 and 85 years, the horizontal eyelid fissure gradually shortened again by about 2.5 mm. Meanwhile, the distance between the lateral canthal angle and the anterior corneal surface decreased almost 1.5 mm. Aging caused an increase of the distance between the pupil centre and the lower eyelid of about 1 mm in men, and 0.5 mm in women. Aging also caused a higher skin crease and raised eyebrows in men and women, but it did not affect the position of the pupil centre and the lateral canthus. Men showed an 0.7 mm larger horizontal eyelid fissure than women. In women, however, the eyebrows were situated about 2.5 mm higher than in men.
CONCLUSION—Aging mainly affects the size of the horizontal eyelid fissure, which lengthens by about 10% between the ages of 12 and 25, and shortens by almost the same amount between middle age and old age. Aging causes sagging of the lower eyelid, especially in men, and a higher skin fold and eyebrow position in both sexes. Aging does not affect the position of the eyeball proper, or of the lateral canthus.

 Keywords: aging; eyelid anatomy; sex

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (105.0 KB).

Figure 1  .

Figure 1  

Open in a new tab

Schematic representation of the measurements. Left: frontal slides. A reference line was drawn through the medial canthus on both sides, vertical lines were drawn through the pupil centre and through the lateral canthal angle. HEF= horizontal eyelid fissure, RL-PC=reference line to pupil centre, PC-UL=pupil centre to upper eyelid margin, PC-LL=pupil centre to lower eyelid margin; the sum of the latter two measurements represents the vertical eyelid fissure. RL-LC=reference line to lateral canthus, UL-SF=upper eyelid margin to skin fold, UL-BR=upper eyelid margin to lower margin of eyebrow, CD=corneal diameter. Right: lateral slides. LC-CO=distance between lateral canthus and anterior corneal surface.

Figure 2  .

Figure 2  

Open in a new tab

Horizontal eyelid fissure size (HEF) in women (left) and men (right). Horizontal axis: average age of each 10 year cohort. Vertical axis: size of the horizontal eyelid fissure (mm). Squares: right eyes, crosses: left eyes. The lines represent the average values, the symbols above and below the lines represent the average value + 1 SD for right eyes and the average value −1 SD for left eyes, respectively.

Figure 3  .

Figure 3  

Open in a new tab

Distance measured from the side between the lateral canthal angle and the anterior corneal surface (LC-CO) in women (left) and men (right). For legend see Figure 2.

Figure 4  .

Figure 4  

Open in a new tab

Distance between the pupil centre and the upper eyelid margin (PC-UL; positive values) and between the pupil centre and the lower eyelid margin (PC-LL; negative values) in women (left) and men (right). For legend see Figure 2.

Figure 5  .

Figure 5  

Open in a new tab

Distance between the upper eyelid margin and the skin fold (UL-SF) in women (left) and men (right). For legend see Figure 2.

Figure 6  .

Figure 6  

Open in a new tab

Distance between the upper eyelid margin and the lower margin of the eyebrow (UL-BR) in women (left) and men (right). For legend see Figure 2.

Figure 7  .

Figure 7  

Open in a new tab

Distribution of the distance between the reference line and the pupil centre (RL-PC) in women (left) and men (right). Horizontal axis: distance in mm. Vertical axis: number of eyelids.

Figure 8  .

Figure 8  

Open in a new tab

Distribution of the distance between the reference line and the lateral canthus (RL-LC) in women (left) and men (right). For legend see Figure 7.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Benger R. S., Frueh B. R. Involutional ectropion: a review of the management. Ophthalmic Surg. 1987 Feb;18(2):136–139. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Benger R. S., Musch D. C. A comparative study of eyelid parameters in involutional entropion. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;5(4):281–287. doi: 10.1097/00002341-198912000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bogren H. G., Franti C. E., Wilmarth S. S. Normal variations of the position of the eye in the orbit. Ophthalmology. 1986 Aug;93(8):1072–1077. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(86)33618-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Camirand A., Doucet J. Surgical advances. A comprehensive approach to surgical rejuvenation of the eyes. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1996 Winter;20(1):15–22. doi: 10.1007/BF02275570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Cartwright M. J., Kurumety U. R., Nelson C. C., Frueh B. R., Musch D. C. Measurements of upper eyelid and eyebrow dimensions in healthy white individuals. Am J Ophthalmol. 1994 Feb 15;117(2):231–234. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)73081-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Collin J. R., Rathbun J. E. Involutional entropion. A review with evaluation of a procedure. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978 Jun;96(6):1058–1064. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1978.03910050578018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Dortzbach R. K., Sutula F. C. Involutional blepharoptosis. A histopathological study. Arch Ophthalmol. 1980 Nov;98(11):2045–2049. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1980.01020040897022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dryden R. M., Leibsohn J., Wobig J. Senile entropion. Pathogenesis and treatment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1978 Oct;96(10):1883–1885. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1978.03910060387019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fox S. A. The palpebral fissure. Am J Ophthalmol. 1966 Jul;62(1):73–78. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(66)91679-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fuchs M., Iosub S., Bingol N., Gromisch D. S. Palpebral fissure size revisited. J Pediatr. 1980 Jan;96(1):77–78. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3476(80)80335-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. González-Ulloa M., Stevens E. The senile eyelid. Aesthetic correction. Arch Ophthalmol. 1967 Sep;78(3):365–368. doi: 10.1001/archopht.1967.00980030367020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Guimarães F. C., Cruz A. A. Palpebral fissure height and downgaze in patients with Graves upper eyelid retraction and congenital blepharoptosis. Ophthalmology. 1995 Aug;102(8):1218–1222. doi: 10.1016/s0161-6420(95)30887-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hill J. C. An analysis of senile changes in the palpebral fissure. Can J Ophthalmol. 1975 Jan;10(1):32–35. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hill J. C. Analysis of senile changes in the palpebral fissure. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K. 1975 Apr;95(1):49–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Imai K., Tajima S. [Measurement of normal eyeball position and its application for evaluation of exophthalmos in craniofacial synostosis]. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993 Sep;92(4):588–592. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199309001-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Liu D., Stasior O. G. Lower eyelid laxity and ocular symptoms. Am J Ophthalmol. 1983 Apr;95(4):545–551. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(83)90279-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Mulliken J. B., Godwin S. L., Pracharktam N., Altobelli D. E. The concept of the sagittal orbital-globe relationship in craniofacial surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1996 Apr;97(4):700–706. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199604000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Yeatts R. P. Measurement of globe position in complex orbital fractures. II. Patient evaluation utilizing a modified exophthalmometer. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;8(2):119–125. doi: 10.1097/00002341-199206000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Zamora R. L., Becker W. L., Custer P. L. Normal eyelid crease position in children. Ophthalmic Surg. 1994 Jan;25(1):42–47. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of Ophthalmology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES