Comparison of Diagnostic Quality of Multidetector Computed Tomography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in High and Low Resolution Modes for Assessment of the Nasal Cavity.
Abbas Shokri, Maryam Foroozandeh, Amin Doosti Irani, Shadi Asalian
{"title":"Comparison of Diagnostic Quality of Multidetector Computed Tomography and Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in High and Low Resolution Modes for Assessment of the Nasal Cavity.","authors":"Abbas Shokri, Maryam Foroozandeh, Amin Doosti Irani, Shadi Asalian","doi":"10.52547/wjps.12.2.77","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to compare the diagnostic quality of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in high (HR) and low (LR) resolution modes for assessment of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This in vitro study was conducted on 5 dry human skulls by using a CBCT and a MDCT scanner in HR and LR modes to assess their diagnostic quality for 21 anatomical landmarks of the nose. The quality of images was evaluated by two oral and maxillofacial radiologists and a dentist using a four-point Likert scale of (I) poor, (II) decreased, (III) good, and (IV) excellent. Data were analyzed by STATA at 95% confidence interval. The Chi-square test was applied to compare the quality of visualization of landmarks based on the type of scanner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT and CT for the majority of landmarks was higher than that of LR CBCT and CT (<i>P</i><0.05). The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT for agger nasi cells (<i>P</i>=0.010), olfactory cleft (<i>P</i>=0.032), sphenoethmoidal recess (<i>P</i>=0.032), and nasolacrimal duct (<i>P</i>=0.014) and LR CBCT for the middle turbinate (<i>P</i>=0.046) and middle meatus (<i>P</i>=0.031) was significantly higher than that of MDCT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT and CT for the majority of the landmarks in the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses was higher than that of LR CBCT and CT. For the majority of landmarks, the diagnostic quality of CBCT and CT was the same; while for some landmarks, the diagnostic quality of HR and LR CBCT was higher than HR and LR CT. In general, CBCT has high efficacy for evaluation of the paranasal sinuses and the nasal cavity, and provides diagnostic information comparable to those provided by CT, but with a much lower radiation dose.</p>","PeriodicalId":23736,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Plastic Surgery","volume":"12 2","pages":"77-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10732283/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52547/wjps.12.2.77","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: We aimed to compare the diagnostic quality of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in high (HR) and low (LR) resolution modes for assessment of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses.
Methods: This in vitro study was conducted on 5 dry human skulls by using a CBCT and a MDCT scanner in HR and LR modes to assess their diagnostic quality for 21 anatomical landmarks of the nose. The quality of images was evaluated by two oral and maxillofacial radiologists and a dentist using a four-point Likert scale of (I) poor, (II) decreased, (III) good, and (IV) excellent. Data were analyzed by STATA at 95% confidence interval. The Chi-square test was applied to compare the quality of visualization of landmarks based on the type of scanner.
Results: The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT and CT for the majority of landmarks was higher than that of LR CBCT and CT (P<0.05). The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT for agger nasi cells (P=0.010), olfactory cleft (P=0.032), sphenoethmoidal recess (P=0.032), and nasolacrimal duct (P=0.014) and LR CBCT for the middle turbinate (P=0.046) and middle meatus (P=0.031) was significantly higher than that of MDCT.
Conclusion: The diagnostic quality of HR CBCT and CT for the majority of the landmarks in the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses was higher than that of LR CBCT and CT. For the majority of landmarks, the diagnostic quality of CBCT and CT was the same; while for some landmarks, the diagnostic quality of HR and LR CBCT was higher than HR and LR CT. In general, CBCT has high efficacy for evaluation of the paranasal sinuses and the nasal cavity, and provides diagnostic information comparable to those provided by CT, but with a much lower radiation dose.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
