The Journal of laryngology and otology · 2014
The value of non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of residual or recurrent middle-ear cholesteatoma.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Velthuis S, van Everdingen K J, Quak J J, Colnot D R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for detection of residual and recurrent middle-ear cholesteatoma after combined-approach tympanoplasty.
METHOD: The magnetic resonance imaging findings after primary surgery for cholesteatoma were compared with intra-operative findings at 'second-look' surgery or with clinical follow-up findings.
RESULTS: Forty-eight magnetic resonance imaging studies were performed in 38 patients. Second-look surgery was performed 21 times in 18 patients. The remaining patients were followed up at the out-patient clinic. There were no false-positive findings with non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; however, there were four false-negative findings. The mean maximum diameter of recurrent cholesteatoma, as assessed using magnetic resonance imaging, was 11.7 mm (range, 4.4-25.3 mm). The sensitivity of non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for detecting cholesteatoma prior to second-look surgery was 0.76, with a specificity of 1.00. When clinical follow up of the non-operated ears was included in the analysis, sensitivity was 0.81 and specificity was 1.00.
CONCLUSION: Recurrent cholesteatoma can be accurately detected using non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Our study, however, also showed some false-negative results. Therefore, strict out-patient follow up is mandatory for those considering using this technique instead of standard second-look surgery.
METHOD: The magnetic resonance imaging findings after primary surgery for cholesteatoma were compared with intra-operative findings at 'second-look' surgery or with clinical follow-up findings.
RESULTS: Forty-eight magnetic resonance imaging studies were performed in 38 patients. Second-look surgery was performed 21 times in 18 patients. The remaining patients were followed up at the out-patient clinic. There were no false-positive findings with non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; however, there were four false-negative findings. The mean maximum diameter of recurrent cholesteatoma, as assessed using magnetic resonance imaging, was 11.7 mm (range, 4.4-25.3 mm). The sensitivity of non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging for detecting cholesteatoma prior to second-look surgery was 0.76, with a specificity of 1.00. When clinical follow up of the non-operated ears was included in the analysis, sensitivity was 0.81 and specificity was 1.00.
CONCLUSION: Recurrent cholesteatoma can be accurately detected using non echo planar, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Our study, however, also showed some false-negative results. Therefore, strict out-patient follow up is mandatory for those considering using this technique instead of standard second-look surgery.