Accuracy of High‐Resolution Computed Tomography Compared to High‐Definition Ear Endoscopy to Assess Cholesteatoma Extension

Author:

Beckmann Sven1ORCID,Hool Sara‐Lynn1,Yacoub Abraam12,Hakim Arsany3,Caversaccio Marco1,Wagner Franca3,Anschuetz Lukas1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital University of Bern Bern Switzerland

2. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Ain Shams University Cairo Egypt

3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital University of Bern Bern Switzerland

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo correlate radiographic evidence of cholesteatoma in the retrotympanum with intraoperative endoscopic findings in cholesteatoma patients and to evaluate the clinical relevance of radiographic evidence of cholesteatoma in the retrotympanum.Study DesignCase series with chart review.SettingTertiary referral center.MethodsSeventy‐six consecutive cases undergoing surgical cholesteatoma removal with preoperative high‐resolution computed tomography (HRCT) were enrolled in this study. A retrospective analysis of the medical records was conducted. The extension of cholesteatoma regarding different middle ear subspaces, into the antrum and mastoid were reviewed radiologically in preoperative HRCT and endoscopically from surgical videos. Additionally, facial nerve canal dehiscence, infiltration of the middle cranial fossa, and inner ear involvement were documented.ResultsComparison of radiological and endoscopic cholesteatoma extension revealed statistically highly significant overestimation of radiological cholesteatoma extension for all retrotympanic regions (sinus tympani 61.8% vs 19.7%, facial recess 69.7% vs 43.4%, subtympanic sinus 59.2% vs 7.9%, and posterior sinus 72.4% vs 4.0%) and statistically significant overestimation for mesotympanum (82.9% vs 56.6%), hypotympanum (39.5% vs 9.2%), and protympanum (23.7% vs 6.6%). No statistically significant differences were found for epitympanum (98.7% vs 90.8%), antrum (64.5% vs 52.6%), and mastoid (26.3% vs 32.9%). Statistically significant radiological overestimation of facial nerve canal dehiscence (54.0% vs 25.0%) and invasion of tegmen tympani (39.5% vs 19.7%) is reported.ConclusionRadiologic cholesteatoma extension in different middle ear subspaces is overestimated compared to the intraoperative extension. The preoperative relevance of radiological retrotympanic extension might be limited in the choice of approach and transcanal endoscopic approach is always recommended first.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Otorhinolaryngology,Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3