Table 3. Comparative analysis of measurement methods and outcomes for the PH in the literature.
PH: Pterygoid hamulus, CBCT: Cone-beam computed tomography, R: Right, L: Left, PHd: Interpterygoid distance
| Authors | No. of pterygoid hamuli | Method | Mean length (cm) | Maximum length (cm) | Minimum length (cm) | Mean Width (cm) | Maximum width (cm) | Minimum width (cm) | Mean angle (o) | Mean PHd (cm) |
| Eyrich et al. [6] | 40 | CT | R:0.49, L:0.5 | 0.8 | 0.3 | - | - | - | - | 3.89 |
| Putz et al. [1] | - | Dry skulls | 0.72 | - | - | 0.14 | - | - | 58 | 3.06 |
| Krmpotić-Nemanić et al. [4] | - | Dry skulls | 6.97± 1.7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | 2.73 to 4.07 |
| Orhan et al. [8] | 396 | CBCT | R:0.54 ± 0.2, L:0.54 ±0.19 | 1.09 | - | R:0.18 ±0.11, L:0.17±0.09 | - | - | - | |
| Oz et al. [9] | 100 | CBCT | R:0.45 ±0.20, L:0.41 ±0.16 | - | - | R:0.17 ±0.05, L:0.16 ±0.04 | - | - | - | - |
| Komarnitki et al. [10] | - | CBCT | 0.67 ± 0.21 | - | - | 0.22 ± 0.05 | - | - | - | - |
| Komarnitki et al. [2] | 100 | CBCT | 0.688 ± 0.22 | 1.2 | 0.09 | 0.18 ± 0.55 | 0.38 | 0.08 | - | - |
| Kuzucu et al. [7] | 174 | CT | R:0.56 to 0.62, L:0.56 to 0.64 | - | - | R:0.15 to 0.18, L:0.15 to 0.18 | - | - | - | 2.75 to 3.26 |
| Mehra et al. [11] | 2000 | CBCT | R:0.67 ±0.17, L:0.69 ±0.16 | - | - | R:0.16 ±0.04, L:0.17 ±0.03 | - | - | - | - |
| Piccin et al. [12] | - | CT | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 2.93 to 3.42 |
| Our study | 87 | Dry skulls | 0.90 ± 0.22 | 1.64 | 0.5 | 0.302 ± 0.099 | 0.5 | 0.12 | 47.8 ± 8.8 | 3.31 ± 0.33 |