Journals / Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology / 2020 / Cilt: 58 - Sayı: 4

The Diagnostic Efficacy of MRI in the Evaluation of the Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct in Children with Hearing Loss

Pages
220–226
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: MRI can be used as an initial imaging technique in children with suspicion of EVA to reduce radiation exposure.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of our study is to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to computed tomography (CT) in the detection of enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) in childhood.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: One hundred twenty-three children who underwent temporal bone CT and MRI examinations for hearing loss between 2013 and 2020 were evaluated retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: MRI can be used as an initial imaging technique in children with suspicion of EVA to reduce radiation exposure.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The aim of our study is to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to computed tomography (CT) in the detection of enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) in childhood. Methods: One hundred twenty-three children who underwent temporal bone CT and MRI examinations for hearing loss between 2013 and 2020 were evaluated retrospectively. All CT and MRI images were examined by two pediatric radiologists, according to the Valvassori and Cincinnati criteria for EVA. Imaging findings on CT and MRI of the vestibular aqueduct were recorded. Two pediatric radiologists performed the measurements for EVA on CT and MRI. In addition, an otolaryngologist performed the measurements independently. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI compared to CT were calculated to detect EVA. The difference between the measurements on CT and MRI was investigated. The inter-observer agreement was evaluated for measurements. Results: The mean age of 123 children (65 boys and 58 girls) was 50.18±50.40 months. Two hundred forty-six ears were evaluated in 123 children. On CT images, EVA was present in 28 (11.3%) of 246 ears according to Cincinnati criteria and 27 (10.9%) of 246 ears according to Valvassori criteria, respectively. While sensitivity, specificity, PPD, and NPD rates of MRI were 100%, 99%, 92.8%, and 100%, respectively, for Cincinnati criteria, for Valvassori criteria, they were 100%, 97.3%, 77.7%, and 100%, respectively. According to the visual evaluation performed without using measurement, the enlarged appearance of the vestibular aqueduct was significant for the diagnosis of EVA (p<0.001), while the absence of this appearance was significant for the exclusion of EVA (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the measurements on CT and MRI. There was a perfect correlation between the observers for measurements. Conclusion: MRI can be used as an initial imaging technique in children with suspicion of EVA to reduce radiation exposure.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARIOĞLU, F. C., ÇAKIR, A., HandanGÜLERYÜZ, H., GÜNERİ, E. (2020). The Diagnostic Efficacy of MRI in the Evaluation of the Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct in Children with Hearing Loss. Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology, Cilt: 58 - Sayı: 4, 220–226. https://ajindex.com/articles/403368

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Mafee MF, Charletta D, Kumar A, Belmont H. Large vestibular aqueduct and congenital sensorineural hearing loss. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1992; 13: 805-19
  2. Valvassori GE, Clemis JD. The large vestibular aqueduct syndrome. Laryngoscope 1978; 88: 723-8
  3. Boston M, Halsted M, Meinzen-Derr J, Bean J, Vijayasekaran S, Arjman E, et al. The large vestibular aqueduct: a new definition based on audiologic and computed tomography correlation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2007; 136: 972-7
  4. Pearce MS, Salotti JA, Little MP, McHugh K, Lee C, Kim KP, et al. Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012; 380: 499-505
  5. Kinner S, Pickhardt PJ, Riedesel EL, Gill KG, Robbins JB, Kitchin DR, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of MRI versus CT for the evaluation of acute appendicitis in children and young adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017; 209: 911-9
  6. Eng KA, Abadeh A, Ligocki C, Lee YK, Moineddin R, Adams-Webber T, et al. Acute appendicitis: a meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, and MRI as second-line imaging tests after an initial US. Radiology 2018; 288: 717-27
  7. Lindberg DM, Stence NV, Grubenhoff JA, Lewis T, Mirsky DM, Miller AL, et al. Feasibility and accuracy of fast MRI versus CT for traumatic brain injury in young children. Pediatrics 2019; 144: e20190419
  8. Joshi VM, Navlekar SK, Kishore GR, Reddy KJ, Kumar EC. CT and MR imaging of the inner ear and brain in children with congenital sensorineural hearing loss. Radiographics 2012; 32: 683- 98
  9. Connor SEJ, Dudau C, Pai I, Gaganasiou M. Is CT or MRI the optimal imaging investigation for the diagnosis of large vestibular aqueduct syndrome and large endolymphatic sac anomaly? Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019; 276: 693-702
  10. Oh JH, Chung JH, Min HJ, Cho SH, Park CW, Lee SH. Clinical application of 3D-FIESTA image in patients with unilateral inner ear symptom. Korean J Audiol 2013; 17:111-7
  11. Cavusoglu M, Cılız DS, Duran S, Ozsoy A, Elverici E, Karaoglanoglu R, et al. Temporal bone MRI with 3D-FIESTA in the evaluation of facial and audiovestibular dysfunction. Diagn Interv Imaging 2016; 97: 863-9
  12. Gurgel RK, Jackler RK, Dobie RA, Popelka GR. A new standardized format for reporting hearing outcome in clinical trials. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2012; 147: 803-7. Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 58(4): 220-6 Sarıoğlu et al. MRI in the Evaluation of the Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct 225 13. Vijayasekaran