4.5 Article

Pharyngeal airspace of asthmatic individuals and those suffering from obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: Study by CBCT

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
卷 95, 期 -, 页码 342-348

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2017.09.002

关键词

Tomography; X-ray computed; Sleep apnea syndromes; Asthma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The objective of the present study was to comparatively evaluate the oropharyngeal space of patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSA) and asthma by means of Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images. Material and methods: The study included individuals with OSA and asthma (n = 10), with OSA and without asthma (n = 6), asthmatics without OSA (n = 6) and healthy individuals (n = 25). All patients were evaluated by a pneumologist and submitted to a nocturnal polysomnogram. Participants underwent CBCT examinations using an I-CAT (R) device (Imaging Sciences International, Hatfield, PA, U.S.A.) and all images were exported to Dolphin Image 3D (R) software. Cephalometric measurements were taken, as well as measurements of length (C), volume (VOL), sagittal area (SA) and minimum cross-sectional area (MCA); an evaluation was made of the format and contour of the upper airway in three dimensions, with p < 0.05 considered significant. Results: In the results of the present study, a statistically significant difference was found between VOL, SA and MCA (p = 0.011; p = 0.009; p = 0.010) with reduced elevated values among the OSA + Asthma, OSA, Asthma and Control groups. Significant differences were seen between the linear (AP), cross-sectional (TR) and mean transverse area (TA) measurements in the group of patients with OSA and asthma as compared to the control group. In the control group, the greatest narrowing of the airway was observed either in the retroglossal or retropalatal area, while more patients in the experimental groups showed narrowing in the retropalatal area. Conclusion: The condition of OSA + asthma was associated with a substantial reduction in upper airway measurements in comparison to controls.

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

4.5
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