Cargando…

Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation

INTRODUCTION: Middle ear volume (MEV) is a clinically relevant parameter across middle ear diseases. MEV values between these techniques have never before been tested for agreement in ears with perforated tympanic membranes (TMs). METHODS: Middle ears were identified from 36 patients ranging 18–89 y...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carpenter, David J., Tucci, Debara L., Kaylie, David M., Frank-Ito, Dennis O.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Chinese PLA General Hospital 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5963459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29937841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joto.2017.04.001
_version_ 1783325040266182656
author Carpenter, David J.
Tucci, Debara L.
Kaylie, David M.
Frank-Ito, Dennis O.
author_facet Carpenter, David J.
Tucci, Debara L.
Kaylie, David M.
Frank-Ito, Dennis O.
author_sort Carpenter, David J.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Middle ear volume (MEV) is a clinically relevant parameter across middle ear diseases. MEV values between these techniques have never before been tested for agreement in ears with perforated tympanic membranes (TMs). METHODS: Middle ears were identified from 36 patients ranging 18–89 years of age with TM perforations who underwent tympanometry and temporal bone computed tomography (CT) between 2005 and 2015. MEVs calculated by both tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction (3DVR) were analyzed for agreement using Bland Altman plots. The differences between tympanometric and 3DVR MEV values for each given middle ear were characterized across MEV quartiles (1 = smallest; 4 = largest) and across increasing states of middle ear disease using Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon testing with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Bland Altman plots demonstrated significant disagreement between MEV measurement techniques. Differences between tympanometric (T) and 3DVR MEV values were significantly greater with increasing average (i.e. (T+3DVR)/2)) MEV per linear regression (p < 0.0001). Significance was demonstrated between fourth and first average MEV quartiles (p = 0.0024), fourth and second quartiles (p = 0.0024), third and first quartiles (p = 0.0048), and third and second quartiles (p = 0.048). Absolute MEV difference was not significantly different across varying states of middle ear disease (p = 0.44). CONCLUSION: Statistically and clinically significant disagreement was demonstrated between tympanometric and 3DVR MEV values. Studies that vary in MEV estimation techniques may be expected to demonstrate significantly different results. These preliminary results suggest that clinicians should endeavor to seek further confirmation when interpreting high tympanometric MEV values.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5963459
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Chinese PLA General Hospital
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59634592018-06-22 Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation Carpenter, David J. Tucci, Debara L. Kaylie, David M. Frank-Ito, Dennis O. J Otol Research Article INTRODUCTION: Middle ear volume (MEV) is a clinically relevant parameter across middle ear diseases. MEV values between these techniques have never before been tested for agreement in ears with perforated tympanic membranes (TMs). METHODS: Middle ears were identified from 36 patients ranging 18–89 years of age with TM perforations who underwent tympanometry and temporal bone computed tomography (CT) between 2005 and 2015. MEVs calculated by both tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction (3DVR) were analyzed for agreement using Bland Altman plots. The differences between tympanometric and 3DVR MEV values for each given middle ear were characterized across MEV quartiles (1 = smallest; 4 = largest) and across increasing states of middle ear disease using Kruskal–Wallis and Wilcoxon testing with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Bland Altman plots demonstrated significant disagreement between MEV measurement techniques. Differences between tympanometric (T) and 3DVR MEV values were significantly greater with increasing average (i.e. (T+3DVR)/2)) MEV per linear regression (p < 0.0001). Significance was demonstrated between fourth and first average MEV quartiles (p = 0.0024), fourth and second quartiles (p = 0.0024), third and first quartiles (p = 0.0048), and third and second quartiles (p = 0.048). Absolute MEV difference was not significantly different across varying states of middle ear disease (p = 0.44). CONCLUSION: Statistically and clinically significant disagreement was demonstrated between tympanometric and 3DVR MEV values. Studies that vary in MEV estimation techniques may be expected to demonstrate significantly different results. These preliminary results suggest that clinicians should endeavor to seek further confirmation when interpreting high tympanometric MEV values. Chinese PLA General Hospital 2017-06 2017-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5963459/ /pubmed/29937841 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joto.2017.04.001 Text en Copyright © 2017, PLA General Hospital Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery. Production and hosting by Elsevier (Singapore) Pte Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
Carpenter, David J.
Tucci, Debara L.
Kaylie, David M.
Frank-Ito, Dennis O.
Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title_full Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title_fullStr Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title_full_unstemmed Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title_short Disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
title_sort disagreement in middle ear volume estimation between tympanometry and three-dimensional volume reconstruction in the context of tympanic membrane perforation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5963459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29937841
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joto.2017.04.001
work_keys_str_mv AT carpenterdavidj disagreementinmiddleearvolumeestimationbetweentympanometryandthreedimensionalvolumereconstructioninthecontextoftympanicmembraneperforation
AT tuccidebaral disagreementinmiddleearvolumeestimationbetweentympanometryandthreedimensionalvolumereconstructioninthecontextoftympanicmembraneperforation
AT kayliedavidm disagreementinmiddleearvolumeestimationbetweentympanometryandthreedimensionalvolumereconstructioninthecontextoftympanicmembraneperforation
AT frankitodenniso disagreementinmiddleearvolumeestimationbetweentympanometryandthreedimensionalvolumereconstructioninthecontextoftympanicmembraneperforation