Internal nasal dimensions of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia: comparison between acoustic rhinometry technique and cone-beam computed tomography.

PURPOSE

To compare the nasal cavity geometry of children and teenagers with cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia by two methods: cone-beam computed tomography, considered the gold standard, and acoustic rhinometry.

METHODS

Data on cone-beam computed tomography and acoustic rhinometry examinations of 17 children and teenagers with cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia, previously obtained for orthodontic planning purposes, were evaluated prospectively. Using Dolphin Imaging 11.8 software, the nasal cavity was reconstructed by two evaluators, and the internal nasal volumes were obtained. Using rhinometry, the volumes of regions V1 and V2 were measured. The values of each examination were then compared at a significance level of 5%.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis showed high intra- and inter-rater reproducibility in the cone-beam computed tomography analysis. The mean internal nasal volumes (± standard deviation) obtained using acoustic rhinometry and cone-beam computed tomography corresponded to 6.6 ± 1.9 cm3 and 8.1 ± 1.5 cm3, respectively. The difference between the examinations was 17.7%, which was considered statistically significant (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The nasal volumes measured via the two methods were different; that is, they presented discrepancies in the measurements. The gold standard technique identified larger volumes than acoustic rhinometry in the nasal cavity. Therefore, determining which test reflects clinical reality is an essential future step.