Comparison of Different Diffusion Weighted MR Techniques in the Diagnosis of the Middle Ear Cholesteatoma–Value of Non-Echo Planar Diffusion-Weighted MRI

Tomasz Zatoński; Marek Sąsiadek; Anna Zimny

ISSN: 2161-119X

HNO-Heilkunde: Open Access

Offener Zugang

Unsere Gruppe organisiert über 3000 globale Konferenzreihen Jährliche Veranstaltungen in den USA, Europa und anderen Ländern. Asien mit Unterstützung von 1000 weiteren wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften und veröffentlicht über 700 Open Access Zeitschriften, die über 50.000 bedeutende Persönlichkeiten und renommierte Wissenschaftler als Redaktionsmitglieder enthalten.

Open-Access-Zeitschriften gewinnen mehr Leser und Zitierungen
700 Zeitschriften und 15.000.000 Leser Jede Zeitschrift erhält mehr als 25.000 Leser

Veröffentlichungsrichtlinien und Ethik

Indiziert in

Index Copernicus
Google Scholar
Sherpa Romeo
Öffnen Sie das J-Tor
Genamics JournalSeek
RefSeek
Hamdard-Universität
EBSCO AZ
OCLC – WorldCat
Publons
Genfer Stiftung für medizinische Ausbildung und Forschung
ICMJE

Mehr sehen

Nützliche Links

Open-Access-Zeitschriften

Mehr sehen

Teile diese Seite

Abstrakt

Comparison of Different Diffusion Weighted MR Techniques in the Diagnosis of the Middle Ear Cholesteatoma?Value of Non-Echo Planar Diffusion-Weighted MRI

Tomasz Zatoński, Marek Sąsiadek and Anna Zimny

Objective: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is essential to detect middle ear cholesteatoma, especially using Diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). The aim of the study was to analyse the value of two different DWI techniques (Echoplanar imaging (EPI) and non-EPI) in the diagnosis of cholesteatoma.

Methods: Our material consisted of 32 patients with a clinical suspicion of cholesteatoma who underwent Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the temporal bone using both EPI and non-EPI DWI. Only studies with histopathological results were included. Two independent readers retrospectively analysed MR images. Intra-and interobserver agreements as well sensitivity, specificity, negative (NPV) and positive (PPV) predictive values of two DWI sequences were assessed.

Results: Using non-EPI DWI all cholesteatomas were correctly diagnosed by both readers with no false negative nor inconclusive cases and with only one false positive result. Non-EPI DWI revealed high interobserver agreement (ĸ=1) and high correlation with histopathological results (r=0.895). EPI DWI misdiagnosed 27-31% of cholesteatomas (false negative results), showing also significantly low interobserver agreement (ĸ=0.373) and low correlation with histopathological results (r=0.328 for reader 1 and r=0.267 for reader 2). Non-EPI DWI revealed very high sensitivity (100%), specificity (83.3%), as well as NPV (100%), and PPV (96.3%) in comparison to EPI DWI which showed lower sensitivity (69.2%), specificity (66.6-83.3%), NPV (33.3-38.4%) and PPV (90-94.7%).

Conclusion: Compared to EPI, non-EPI DWI is a highly reliable method of detecting middle ear cholesteatoma with high sensitivity, specificity and interobserver agreement which make this technique very useful in the clinical settings regardless of the pre- or postoperative state of the ear.