4.6 Article

Imaging of inner ear malformations: a primer for radiologists

期刊

RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
卷 126, 期 10, 页码 1282-1295

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-021-01387-z

关键词

Inner ear malformations; Sensorineural hearing loss; Multidetector Computed Tomography; Magnetic resonance imaging

资金

  1. Alma Mater Studiorum Universita di Bologna within the CRUI-CARE Agreement

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The correct diagnosis of inner ear malformations is crucial for the management of patients. High-resolution MRI and HRCT are main imaging techniques, but in cases of congenital malformations, these techniques should be considered complementary.
In the multidisciplinary management of patients with inner ear malformations (IEMs), the correct diagnosis makes the differences in terms of clinical and surgical treatment. The complex anatomical landscape of the inner ear, comprising several small structures, makes imaging of this region particularly challenging for general radiologists. Imaging techniques are important for identifying the presence and defining the type of IEM and the cochlear nerve condition. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) are the mainstay imaging techniques in this area. Dedicated MRI and HRCT protocols play an important role in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with inner ear disease. The most suitable technique should be selected depending on the clinical setting. However, in cases of congenital malformation of the inner ear, these techniques should be considered complementary. Since prompt intervention has a positive impact on the treatment outcomes, early diagnosis of IEMs is very important in the management of deaf patients. This article reviews the key concepts of IEMs for clinical radiologists by focusing on recent literature updates, discusses the principal imaging findings and clinical implications for every IEM subgroup, thus providing a practical diagnostic approach.

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

4.6
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