4.4 Article

The value of four stage vestibular hydrops grading and asymmetric perilymphatic enhancement in the diagnosis of Meniere's disease on MRI

期刊

NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 61, 期 4, 页码 421-429

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-019-02155-7

关键词

Magnetic resonance imaging; Meniere's disease; Endolymphatic hydrops; Perilymph; Classification; Diagnosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose There is still a clinical-radiologic discrepancy in patients with Meniere's disease (MD). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the reliability of current MRI endolymphatic hydrops (EH) criteria according to Barath in a larger study population and the clinical utility of new imaging signs such as a supplementary fourth low-grade vestibular EH and the degree of perilymphatic enhancement (PE) in patients with Meniere's disease (MD). Methods This retrospective study included 148 patients with probable or definite MD according to the 2015 American Academy of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery criteria who underwent a 4-h delayed intravenous Gd-enhanced 3D-FLAIR MRI between January 2015 and December 2016. Vestibular EH, vestibular PE, cochlear EH, and cochlear PE were reviewed twice by three experienced readers. Cohen's Kappa and multivariate logistic regression were used for analysis. Results The intra- and inter-reader reliability for the grading of vestibular-cochlear EH and PE was excellent (0.7 < kappa < 0.9). The two most distinctive characteristics to identify MD are cochlear PE and vestibular EH which combined gave a sensitivity and specificity of 79.5 and 93.6%. By addition of a lower grade vestibular EH, the sensitivity improved to 84.6% without losing specificity (92.3%). Cochlear EH nor vestibular PE showed added-value. Conclusions MRI using vestibular-cochlear EH and PE grading system is a reliable technique. A four-stage vestibular EH grading system in combination with cochlear PE assessment gives the best diagnostic accuracy to detect MD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据