AAPSArchives of Aesthetic Plastic SurgeryArch Aesthetic Plast Surg2234-08312288-9337Korean Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery10.14730/aaps.2022.00507aaps-2022-00507CommunicationOculoplastic SurgeryComments on “Usefulness of the eyeball exposure area as an eye measurement modality through a comparison between eyes with inborn double eyelids and operated double eyelids”http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1994-2538HwangKun
Department of Plastic Surgery, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, KoreaCorrespondence: Kun Hwang Department of Plastic Surgery, Inha University College of Medicine, 27 Inhang-ro, Jung-gu, Incheon 22332, Korea Tel: +82-32-890-3514, Fax: +82-32-890-2918, E-mail: jokerhg@inha.ac.kr
This study was supported by a grant from National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020R1I1A2054761).
These comments refer to a paper recently published in Archives of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (Kim et al. Usefulness of the eyeball exposure area as an eye measurement modality through a comparison between eyes with inborn double eyelids and operated double eyelids) [1]. I read this paper with interest because it provides anthropometric data on young Korean women.
The authors measured 92 eyes with natural double eyelids and 76 eyes with only double eyelidplasty, and compared these groups through measurements of the exposed eyeball area and palpebral fissure height. These values were adjusted to a percentage value, and the authors performed measurements and corrected their findings to match the average corneal diameter (11.3 mm) of Korean women previously reported by Bae et al. [2].
As shown in Fig. 1, the author used this mean value (11.3 mm) as the “vertical corneal diameter” [1]. However, this value is not the mean value of the “vertical corneal diameter,” because Bae et al. [2] measured only the “horizontal corneal diameter.” The human cornea is not a perfect circle. According to Wolff’s Anatomy, the mean vertical corneal diameter (10.6 mm) is shorter than the mean horizontal corneal diameter (11.75 mm) [3]. Therefore, the results of the authors’ values should be corrected according to the vertical/horizontal ratio of the human cornea.
Kun Hwang is an editorial board member of the journal but was not involved in the peer reviewer selection, evaluation, or decision process of this article. No other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
REFERENCESKimSHHanDGParkJHUsefulness of the eyeball exposure area as an eye measurement modality through a comparison between eyes with inborn double eyelids and operated double eyelids2022284952BaeTHKimJCKimWSA photogrammetic study of the eyes in Korean youths2007343743BronAJTripathiRCTripathiBJWolff’s anatomy of the eye and orbitBronAJTripathiRCTripathiBJ8th edLondonHodder Education Publishers1997217