Abstract
Sir—I was interested to read the Technical Report by Lip and Nichols 1 Lip G. Nichols D.M. Measurement of defect angle in superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Clin Radiol. 2009; 64: 1210-1213 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (8) Google Scholar in the Journal. As the radiologist involved in two recent studies looking at the importance of the size of the dehiscence 2 Rajan G.P. Leaper M.R. Goggin L. et al. The effects of superior semicircular canal dehiscence on the labyrinth: does size matter?. Otol Neurotol. 2008; 29: 972-975 Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar , 3 Yuen H.-W. Boeddinghaus R. Eikelboom R.H. et al. The relationship between the air–bone gap and the size of superior semicircular canal dehiscence. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 141: 689-694 Crossref PubMed Scopus (35) Google Scholar (one of which Lip and Nichols referred to 2 Rajan G.P. Leaper M.R. Goggin L. et al. The effects of superior semicircular canal dehiscence on the labyrinth: does size matter?. Otol Neurotol. 2008; 29: 972-975 Crossref PubMed Scopus (28) Google Scholar ), I feel bound to reply and explain the reasons for choosing a simple linear measurement of the size of the dehiscence. Alternative methods considered were to measure the angle subtended by the arc of the dehiscent segment (as these authors have done), or the (curvilinear) length along the segment of the circumference of the canal. Re: Measurement of defect angle in superior semicircular canal dehiscence. A replyClinical RadiologyVol. 65Issue 10PreviewWe read with interest Dr Boeddinghaus’s letter regarding our paper1 and are grateful for the informative contribution clarifying details of the technique used in the studies undertaken by his group, which were based on wider larger experience than ours. Full-Text PDF
Published Version
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