Identification of residual–recurrent cholesteatoma in operated ears: diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT and MRI
- 22 Downloads
The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) to identify residual–recurrent cholesteatoma using the second-look surgery as the reference standard.
This prospective, institutional review board-approved study included 19 consecutive patients (11 males and 8 females; mean age of 62.2, range 34–80 years). Since five patients were studied bilaterally, a total of 24 ears were evaluated with DECT and MRI between February 2017 and June 2018. Any abnormal middle ear attenuation on high-resolution CT images (HRCT) or DECT color-coded maps, and any abnormal signal on MRI images was evaluated by four experienced radiologists. Diagnostic accuracy values of HRCT, DECT maps and CT numbers (by using receiver operator curves) and MRI were compared. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement were calculated.
Residual–recurrent cholesteatoma was diagnosed at surgery in 16/24 ears (66.6%). MRI and DECT revealed a total of 15/16 and 14/16 cholesteatomas, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV and accuracy of MRI and DECT were 93.7, 87.5, 93.7, 87.5, and 91.6% and 87.5, 87.5, 93.3, 87.5 and 87.5%, respectively. CT numbers were significantly different between positive (mean 57.6 HU, range − 65, 112 HU) and negative cases (mean 5.4 HU, range − 100, 66 HU) with p < 0.001. The interobserver and intraobserver agreement were k = 0.87 and k = 0.83, respectively.
DECT may provide an accurate demonstration of residual–recurrent middle ear cholesteatoma.
KeywordsCholesteatoma Magnetic resonance imaging Diffusion-weighted images Dual-energy CT Recurrence
Dual-energy computed tomography
Magnetic resonance imaging
Positive predictive value
Negative predictive value
Region of interest
Area under curve
High-resolution computed tomography
We did not receive any funds for this paper.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standard of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standard.
This retrospective study received institutional review board and Informed consent was waived.
- 1.Swartz JD (1984) Cholesteatomas of the middle ear. Diagnosis, etiology, and complications. Radiol Clin North Am 22:15–35Google Scholar
- 4.Probst R (2006) The middle ear. In: Probst R, Grevers G, Iro H (eds) Basic otorhinolaryngology: a step-by-step learning guide, 2nd edn. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 227–253Google Scholar
- 5.Thukral CL, Singh A, Singh S et al (2015) Role of high resolution computed tomography in evaluation of pathologies of temporal bone. J Clin Diagn Res 9(9):TC07–TC10Google Scholar
- 7.Blaney SP, Tierney P, Oyarazabal M et al (2000) CT scanning in “second look” combined approach tympanoplasty. Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol 121:79–81 (PMID: 10997063) Google Scholar
- 9.Lincot J, Veillon F, Riehm S et al (2015) Middle ear cholesteatoma: compared diagnostic performances of two incremental MRI protocols including non-echo planar diffusion-weighted imaging acquired on 3T and 1.5T scanners. J Neuroradiol 42(4):193–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurad.2014.02.003 (Epub 9 Jul 2014) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Dremmen MH, Hofman PA, Hof JR et al (2012) The diagnostic accuracy of non-echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in the detection of residual and/or recurrent cholesteatoma of the temporal bone. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33(3):439–444. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2824 (Epub 22 Dec 2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Chen S, Ikawa F, Kurisu K et al (2001) Quantitative MR evaluation of intracranial epidermoid tumors by fast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging and echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 22:1089–1096 (PMID: 11415903) Google Scholar
- 15.Karçaaltincaba M, Aktas A (2011) Dual-energy CT revisited with multidetector CT: review of principles and clinical applications. Diagn Interv Radiol 17:181–194Google Scholar
- 22.Bodanapally UK, Shanmuganathan K, Issa G et al (2018) Dual-Energy CT in hemorrhagic progression of cerebral contusion: overestimation of hematoma volumes on standard 120-kV images and rectification with virtual high-energy monochromatic images after contrast-enhanced whole-body imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 39(4):658–662. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5558 (Epub 8 Feb 2018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Bonatti M, Lombardo F, Zamboni GA et al (2018) Iodine extravasation quantification on dual-energy CT of the brain performed after mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke can predict hemorrhagic complications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1(2):3–4. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.a5513 (Epub ahead of print) Google Scholar
- 24.Magarelli N, De Santis V, Marziali G et al (2018) Application and advantages of monoenergetic reconstruction images for the reduction of metallic artifacts using dual-energy CT in knee and hip prostheses. Radiol Med 123(8):593–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-018-0881-8 (Epub 10 Apr 2018) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Rogha M, Hashemi SM, Mokhtarinejad F et al (2014) Comparison of preoperative temporal bone CT with intraoperative findings in patients with cholesteatoma. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 26(74):7–12Google Scholar
- 28.Ayache D, Darrouzet V, Dubrulle F et al (2012) French society of otolaryngology head and neck surgery (SFORL). Imaging of non-operated cholesteatoma: clinical practice guidelines. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 129(3):148–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2011.09.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar