Güldner Christian, Diogo Isabell, Bernd Eva, Dräger Stephanie, Mandapathil Magis, Teymoortash Afshin, Negm Hesham, Wilhelm Thomas
University Department of ORL, Head and Neck Surgery, UKGM, Marburg, Germany.
Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Giza, Egypt.
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2017 Feb;274(2):737-742. doi: 10.1007/s00405-016-4345-2. Epub 2016 Oct 17.
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT, syn. digital volume tomography = DVT) was introduced into ENT imaging more than 10 years ago. The main focus was on imaging of the paranasal sinuses and traumatology of the mid face. In recent years, it has also been used in imaging of chronic ear diseases (especially in visualizing middle and inner ear implants), but an exact description of the advantages and limitations of visualizing precise anatomy in a relevant number of patients is still missing. The data sets of CBCT imaging of the middle and inner ear of 204 patients were analyzed regarding the visualization of 18 different anatomic structures. A three-step scale (excellent visible, partial visible, not visible) was taken. All analyses were performed by two surgeons experienced in otology and imaging. The indications for imaging were chronic middle ear disease or conductive hearing loss. Previously operated patients were excluded to rule out possible confounders. In dependence of a radiological pathology/opacity of the middle ear, two groups (with and without pathology) were built. Regarding the possibility of excellent visualization, significant differences were only found for small bony structures: incu-stapedial joint (25.8 vs. 63.5 %), long process of incus (42.7 vs. 88.8 %), head of stapes (27.0 vs. 62.6 %), anterior crus of stapes (16.9 vs. 40.9 %) and posterior crus of stapes (19.1 vs. 42.6 %). The other structures (semicircular canals, skull base at mastoid and middle ear, jugular bulb, sinus sigmoideus, facial nerve) could be visualized well in both groups with rates around 85-100 %. Even CBCT shows little limitations in visualization of the small structures of the middle and inner ear. Big bony structures can be visualized in normal as well as in pathologic ears. Overall, due to pathology of middle ear, an additional limitation of evaluation of the ossicular chain exists. In future, studies should focus on comparative evaluation of different diseases and different radiological modalities and be performed by radiologists and otologists together to improve the quality of reports and to answer clinical questions more satisfactorily.
锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT,同义词:数字容积断层扫描 = DVT)于10多年前被引入耳鼻喉科成像领域。主要重点在于鼻窦成像和中面部创伤学。近年来,它也被用于慢性耳部疾病的成像(特别是用于可视化中耳和内耳植入物),但对于在相当数量的患者中可视化精确解剖结构的优势和局限性仍缺乏确切描述。对204例患者中耳和内耳的CBCT成像数据集进行了分析,以观察18种不同解剖结构的可视化情况。采用了一个三步量表(清晰可见、部分可见、不可见)。所有分析均由两名在耳科学和成像方面有经验的外科医生进行。成像的适应证为慢性中耳疾病或传导性听力损失。排除先前接受过手术的患者以排除可能的混杂因素。根据中耳的放射学病理/混浊情况,构建了两组(有病理和无病理)。关于清晰可视化的可能性,仅在小骨结构方面发现了显著差异:砧镫关节(25.8% 对 63.5%)、砧骨长突(42.7% 对 88.8%)、镫骨头(27.0% 对 62.6%)、镫骨前脚(16.9% 对 40.9%)和镫骨后脚(19.1% 对 42.6%)。其他结构(半规管、乳突和中耳处的颅底、颈静脉球、乙状窦、面神经)在两组中均可良好可视化,可视化率约为85 - 100%。即使CBCT在中耳和内耳小结构的可视化方面显示出很少的局限性。大骨结构在正常耳和病理耳中均可可视化。总体而言,由于中耳的病理情况,存在对听骨链评估的额外局限性。未来,研究应侧重于不同疾病和不同放射学模式的比较评估,并由放射科医生和耳科医生共同进行,以提高报告质量并更令人满意地回答临床问题。