Abstract

Background and purposeWe explored whether there was a difference between measurements obtained with CT and MRI for the diagnosis of large vestibular aqueduct syndrome or large endolymphatic sac anomaly, and whether this influenced diagnosis on the basis of previously published threshold values (Valvassori and Cincinnati). We also investigated whether isolated dilated extra-osseous endolymphatic sac occurred on MRI. Secondary objectives were to compare inter-observer reproducibility for the measurements, and to investigate any mismatch between the diagnoses using the different criteria.Materials/methodsSubjects diagnosed with large vestibular aqueduct syndrome or large endolymphatic sac anomalies were retrospectively analysed. For subjects with both CT and MRI available (n = 58), two independent observers measured the midpoint and operculum widths. For subjects with MRI (± CT) available (n = 84), extra-osseous sac widths were also measured.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the width measurements obtained with CT versus MRI. CT alone diagnosed large vestibular aqueduct syndrome or large endolymphatic sac anomalies in 2/58 (Valvassori) and 4/58 (Cincinnati), whilst MRI alone diagnosed them in 2/58 (Valvassori). There was 93% CT/MRI diagnostic agreement using both criteria. Only 1/84 demonstrated isolated extra-osseous endolymphatic sac dilatation. The MRI-based LVAS/LESA diagnosis was less dependent on which criteria were used. Midpoint measurements are more reproducible between observers and between CT/MR imaging modalities.ConclusionSupplementing MRI with CT results in additional diagnoses using either criterion, however, there is no net increased diagnostic sensitivity for CT versus MRI when applying the Valvassori criteria. Isolated enlargement of the extra-osseous endolymphatic sac is rare.

Highlights

  • MRI and criteria for diagnosing LVAS (CT) are widely and variably used for the evaluation of potential inner ear developmental anomalies in patients with audio-vestibular symptoms

  • There was 93% CT/MRI diagnostic agreement and no significant difference was demonstrated between CT and MRI in terms of their ability to diagnose LVAS/large endolymphatic sac anomaly (LESA) using either Valvassori or Cincinnati criteria (p > 0.05; Chi sq)

  • CT was historically used to depict the inner ear structures, MRI is generally accepted as the imaging investigation of choice for sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL), and there is a trend to its primary use in the planning of cochlear implantation [18, 20, 21]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

MRI and CT are widely and variably used for the evaluation of potential inner ear developmental anomalies in patients with audio-vestibular symptoms. The most frequent macroscopic inner ear abnormality demonstrated on imaging studies is that of the large vestibular aqueduct (LVAS) as shown by CT [1,2,3,4,5] or large endolymphatic sac anomaly (LESA) as shown by MRI [6,7,8]. There may be cases where the extra-osseous endolymphatic sac is clearly dilated on MRI yet the intra-osseous components are within normal limits and there is no abnormality demonstrated on CT [12] This situation may be more common in patients with short vestibular aqueducts. Materials/methods Subjects diagnosed with large vestibular aqueduct syndrome or large endolymphatic sac anomalies were retrospectively analysed For subjects with both CT and MRI available (n = 58), two independent observers measured the midpoint and operculum widths.

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.