ArticleTurkish archives of otorhinolaryngology2020
The Diagnostic Efficacy of MRI in the Evaluation of the Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct in Children with Hearing Loss.
Article in Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does CISS MRI Reliably Depict the Endolymphatic Duct in Children with and without Vestibular Aqueduct Enlargement?AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2024Article
- Can MRI biomarkers for hearing loss in enlarged vestibular aqueduct be measured reproducibly?The British journal of radiology · 2023Article
- 2D Measurements of the Angle of the Vestibular Aqueduct Using CT Imaging.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of our study is to evaluate the diagnostic effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compared to computed tomography (CT) in the detection of enlarged vestibular aqueduct (EVA) in childhood.
methodsOne hundred twenty-three children who underwent temporal bone CT and MRI examinations for hearing loss between 2013 and 2020 were evaluated retrospectively. All CT and MRI images were examined by two pediatric radiologists, according to the Valvassori and Cincinnati criteria for EVA. Imaging findings on CT and MRI of the vestibular aqueduct were recorded. Two pediatric radiologists performed the measurements for EVA on CT and MRI. In addition, an otolaryngologist performed the measurements independently. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of MRI compared to CT were calculated to detect EVA. The difference between the measurements on CT and MRI was investigated. The inter-observer agreement was evaluated for measurements.
resultsThe mean age of 123 children (65 boys and 58 girls) was 50.18±50.40 months. Two hundred forty-six ears were evaluated in 123 children. On CT images, EVA was present in 28 (11.3%) of 246 ears according to Cincinnati criteria and 27 (10.9%) of 246 ears according to Valvassori criteria, respectively. While sensitivity, specificity, PPD, and NPD rates of MRI were 100%, 99%, 92.8%, and 100%, respectively, for Cincinnati criteria, for Valvassori criteria, they were 100%, 97.3%, 77.7%, and 100%, respectively. According to the visual evaluation performed without using measurement, the enlarged appearance of the vestibular aqueduct was significant for the diagnosis of EVA (p<0.001), while the absence of this appearance was significant for the exclusion of EVA (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the measurements on CT and MRI. There was a perfect correlation between the observers for measurements.
conclusionMRI can be used as an initial imaging technique in children with suspicion of EVA to reduce radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.