Ali R Sepahdari1, Gail Ishiyama2, Nopawan Vorasubin3, Kevin A Peng3, Michael Linetsky4, Akira Ishiyama3. 1. Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA. Electronic address: ali.sepahdari@gmail.com. 2. Department of Neurology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA. 3. Department of Head and Neck Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA. 4. Department of Radiological Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Using three-dimensional fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging (3D-FLAIR MRI), our goal was to correlate quantifiable measures of endolymphatic hydrops (EH) with auditory function in the setting of Meniere's disease (MD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one ears were analyzed in 21 subjects (12 ears with MD, 29 without MD). Vestibular endolymphatic space size measurements obtained with two different techniques were referenced against clinical data. RESULTS: EH was better evaluated on 3D maximum intensity projections (MIPs) than on two-dimensional (2D) images. Using MIPs, quantitative assessments EH correlated with severity of hearing impairment. CONCLUSION: 3D MIPs were superior to 2D images for evaluating EH in the setting of MD.
OBJECTIVE: Using three-dimensional fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging (3D-FLAIR MRI), our goal was to correlate quantifiable measures of endolymphatic hydrops (EH) with auditory function in the setting of Meniere's disease (MD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one ears were analyzed in 21 subjects (12 ears with MD, 29 without MD). Vestibular endolymphatic space size measurements obtained with two different techniques were referenced against clinical data. RESULTS: EH was better evaluated on 3D maximum intensity projections (MIPs) than on two-dimensional (2D) images. Using MIPs, quantitative assessments EH correlated with severity of hearing impairment. CONCLUSION: 3D MIPs were superior to 2D images for evaluating EH in the setting of MD.
Authors: J M van Steekelenburg; A van Weijnen; L M H de Pont; O D Vijlbrief; C C Bommeljé; J P Koopman; B M Verbist; H M Blom; S Hammer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Nahmani; A Vaussy; C Hautefort; J-P Guichard; A Guillonet; E Houdart; A Attyé; M Eliezer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-19 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M N Pakdaman; G Ishiyama; A Ishiyama; K A Peng; H J Kim; W B Pope; A R Sepahdari Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: G Conte; L Caschera; S Calloni; S Barozzi; F Di Berardino; D Zanetti; C Scuffi; E Scola; C Sina; F Triulzi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2018-10-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: G Conte; S Casale; L Caschera; F M Lo Russo; C Paolella; C Cinnante; F Di Berardino; D Zanetti; D Stocchetti; E Scola; L Bassi; F Triulzi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 3.825