PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether orbital ultrasonography (US) with a curved-array transducer could be an alternative imaging method to computed tomography (CT) to detect orbital wall fractures and fractures of the infraorbital rim. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with the clinical ophthalmologic or radiologic diagnosis of an orbital trauma were investigated prospectively by US and CT. The reference method was the intraoperative findings. RESULTS: CT evaluation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 79%, a specificity of 90%, and an accuracy of 94%. The positive predictive value (PPV) and the negative predictive value (NPV) of the infraorbital rim reached 69% and 83%, respectively. CT evaluation of the orbital floor showed a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 71%, and an accuracy of 96%. PPV and NPV resulted in 71% and 93%, respectively. US investigation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 89%, and an accuracy of 97%, whereas PPV and NPV reached 65% and 83%, respectively. US investigation of the orbital floor reached a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 57%, and an accuracy of 96%, whereas PPV and NPV yielded 57% and 91%, respectively. No significant difference was found between US and CT in the investigation of the infraorbital rim (P =.809) and the orbital floor (P =.729). CONCLUSIONS: US with a curved-array transducer appears to be a useful alternative method in the investigation of orbital floor fractures. Further studies have to be conducted to reduce the presence of false-negative results.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether orbital ultrasonography (US) with a curved-array transducer could be an alternative imaging method to computed tomography (CT) to detect orbital wall fractures and fractures of the infraorbital rim. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with the clinical ophthalmologic or radiologic diagnosis of an orbital trauma were investigated prospectively by US and CT. The reference method was the intraoperative findings. RESULTS: CT evaluation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 79%, a specificity of 90%, and an accuracy of 94%. The positive predictive value (PPV) and the negative predictive value (NPV) of the infraorbital rim reached 69% and 83%, respectively. CT evaluation of the orbital floor showed a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 71%, and an accuracy of 96%. PPV and NPV resulted in 71% and 93%, respectively. US investigation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 89%, and an accuracy of 97%, whereas PPV and NPV reached 65% and 83%, respectively. US investigation of the orbital floor reached a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 57%, and an accuracy of 96%, whereas PPV and NPV yielded 57% and 91%, respectively. No significant difference was found between US and CT in the investigation of the infraorbital rim (P =.809) and the orbital floor (P =.729). CONCLUSIONS: US with a curved-array transducer appears to be a useful alternative method in the investigation of orbital floor fractures. Further studies have to be conducted to reduce the presence of false-negative results.
Authors: Thásia L D Ferreira; Andre Luiz F Costa; Maria José A Tucunduva; Raul R Tucunduva-Neto; Elio H Shinohara; Cláudio F de Freitas Journal: J Oral Biol Craniofac Res Date: 2016-10-15
Authors: In Sook Lee; Jung-Hoon Lee; Chang-Ki Woo; Hak Jin Kim; Yu Li Sol; Jong Woon Song; Kyu-Sup Cho Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2015-03-08 Impact factor: 2.503