European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2018
Cone beam versus multi-detector computed tomography for detecting hearing loss.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Debeaupte Mathilde, Hermann Ruben, Pialat Jean-Baptiste, Martinon Amanda, Truy Eric, Ltaief Boudrigua Aicha
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the diagnostic value of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) is equivalent or superior to that of multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for the radiological assessment of conductive hearing loss with intact tympanic membrane in adults. Evaluation of inter- and intraobserver variability and measurement of the radiation dosimetry associated with each technique were secondary objectives.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-center study.
METHODS: Ten adults were included from April to June 2013. All patients underwent MDCT and CBCT with reconstruction of temporal bones. Two radiologists with ENT experience reviewed the results twice. Diagnostic agreement between MDCT and CBCT and inter- and intraobserver agreement was evaluated with the kappa statistic. Comparisons of dosimetry were evaluated by calculating the ratio of the CT dose index (CTDI) between MDCT and CBCT.
RESULTS: Diagnostic agreement between MDCT and CBCT was satisfactory (kappa = 0.69). Inter- and intraobserver agreement was also acceptable, and the average ratio of the CTDI of MDCT and CBCT was 4.01.
CONCLUSION: CBCT is a reliable method that uses a low dose of radiation to investigate conductive hearing loss with intact tympanic membrane in adults. Its relevance and potential superiority to MDCT in diagnosing middle ear pathologies such as otosclerosis remain to be demonstrated, but the preliminary data are promising.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single-center study.
METHODS: Ten adults were included from April to June 2013. All patients underwent MDCT and CBCT with reconstruction of temporal bones. Two radiologists with ENT experience reviewed the results twice. Diagnostic agreement between MDCT and CBCT and inter- and intraobserver agreement was evaluated with the kappa statistic. Comparisons of dosimetry were evaluated by calculating the ratio of the CT dose index (CTDI) between MDCT and CBCT.
RESULTS: Diagnostic agreement between MDCT and CBCT was satisfactory (kappa = 0.69). Inter- and intraobserver agreement was also acceptable, and the average ratio of the CTDI of MDCT and CBCT was 4.01.
CONCLUSION: CBCT is a reliable method that uses a low dose of radiation to investigate conductive hearing loss with intact tympanic membrane in adults. Its relevance and potential superiority to MDCT in diagnosing middle ear pathologies such as otosclerosis remain to be demonstrated, but the preliminary data are promising.