Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2018, vol. 27, nr 4, April, p. 541–545

doi: 10.17219/acem/80858

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

Reliability of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis

Marcin Frączek1,A,B,C,D,F, Marcin Masalski1,B, Maciej Guziński2,B,E

1 Department of Otolaryngology, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland

2 Department of Radiology, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland

Abstract

Background. Paranasal computed tomography (CT) has become the investigation method of choice to confirm or exclude the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) on the basis of its ability to deliver objective data regarding the presence of inflamed mucosa or polyps.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to assess the reliability of CT scan findings among untreated CRS patients without the presence of polyps in a nasal endoscopy.
Material and Methods. Among patients with clinically demonstrated CRS considered for surgery, 93 subjects who had had 2 CT scans performed at different time points in the diagnostic process were enrolled into the study. Paranasal sinus involvement on both CT scans was scored using the Lund-Mackay (L-M) and modified Lund-Mackay scales. Both CT exams served to assess the extent of the potential endoscopic sinus surgery.
Results. The time interval between CT scans ranged from 31 to 1,162 days (mean: 338 days). The L-M scores from the 1st CT examination correlated statistically with the results of the 2nd CT (r = 0.86; p < 0.05). When compared to the 1st scan, the L-M score in the 2nd CT scan remained the same in 36 patients (39%), increased in 23 patients (25%) and decreased in 34 patients (36%). There was no statistically significant correlation between the change in the L-M scores and the time interval between CT examinations.
Conclusion. The present study indicates that mucosal thickening within paranasal sinuses among untreated patients with CRS is stable over shortand middle-time intervals, regardless of the initial intensity of the disease. The time delay between the CT examination and qualification for surgery does not influence the decision regarding the performance of the operation. The results suggest the conclusion that repeating CT scans in symptomatic, untreated patients with CRS should be seriously considered.

Key words

surgery, diagnosis, reliability, tomography, sinusitis

References (18)

  1. Hadley JA, Schaefer SD. Clinical evaluation of rhinosinusitis: History and physical examination. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:S8–11.
  2. Fokkens WJ, Lund VJ, Mullol J, et al. European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. Rhinol Suppl. 2012;3:1–298.
  3. Bhattacharyya N, Lee LN. Evaluating the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis based on clinical guidelines and endoscopy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;143:147–151.
  4. White PS, Maclennan AC, Connolly AA, Crowther J, Bingham BJ. Analysis of CT scanning referrals for chronic rhinosinusitis. J Laryngol Otol. 1996;110:641–643.
  5. Bhattacharyya N. Test-retest reliability of computed tomography in the assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Laryngoscope. 1999;109:1055–1058.
  6. Mazonakis M, Tzedakis A, Damilakis J, Gourtsoyiannis N. Thyroid dose from common head and neck CT examinations in children: Is there an excess risk for thyroid cancer induction? Eur Radiol. 2007;17:1352–1357.
  7. Ibrahim M, Parmar H, Christodoulou E, Mukherji S. Raise the bar and lower the dose: Current and future strategies for radiation dose reduction in head and neck imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35:619–624.
  8. Lund VJ, Kennedy DW. Quantification for staging sinusitis: The staging and therapy group. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Supl. 1995;167:17–21.
  9. Hopkins C, Browne JP, Slack R, Lund V, Brown P. The Lund-Mackay staging system for chronic rhinosinusitis: How is it used and what does it predict? Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;137:555–561.
  10. Meltzer EO, Hamilos DL, Hadley JA, et al. Rhinosinusitis: Establishing definitions for clinical research and patient care. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004;114:155–212.
  11. Lund VJ, Kennedy DW. Staging for rhinosinusitis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:S35–S40.
  12. Bhattacharyya N, Fried MP. The accuracy of computer tomography in the diagnosis of chronic sinusitis. Laryngoscope. 2003;113:125–129.
  13. Bhattacharyya N. Do maxillary sinus retention cysts reflect obstructive sinus phenomena? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;126:1369–1371.
  14. Calhoun K, Waggenspack G. CT evaluation of the paranasal sinuses in symptomatic and asymptomatic populations. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1991;104:480–483.
  15. Stankiewicz JA, Chow JM. A diagnostic dilemma for chronic rhinosinusitis: Definition, accuracy and validity. Am J Rhinol. 2002;16:199–202.
  16. Ferguson BJ, Narita M, Yu VL, Wagener MM, Gwaltney JM Jr. Prospective observational study of chronic rhinosinusitis: Environmental triggers and antibiotic implications. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:62–68.
  17. Kenny TJ, Duncavage J, Bracikowski J, Yildirim A, Murray JJ, Tanner SB. Prospective analysis of sinus symptoms and correlation with paranasal computed tomography scan. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;125:40–43.
  18. Okushi T, Nakayama T, Morimoto S, et al. A modified Lund-Mackay system for radiological evaluation of chronic rhinosinusitis. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2013;40:548–553.
© Wroclaw Medical University