| Literature DB >> 33204372 |
Nevin Aydın1, Suzan Saylısoy1, Baki Adapınar2, Didem Arslantas3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to prospectively assess the Eustachian tube (ET) cartilage using 3 Tesla (3T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and compare the results between healthy ears and those with a middle ear disease.Entities:
Keywords: 3T MRI; Eustachian tube; Eustachian tube cartilage
Year: 2020 PMID: 33204372 PMCID: PMC7654315 DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2020.99756
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pol J Radiol ISSN: 1733-134X
Axial 3D MERGE sequence parameters
| Parameters | Axial 3D MERGE |
|---|---|
| TR | 73.7 |
| TE | 12.3 |
| FOV (field of view) | 22 |
| Matrix size | 256 × 256 |
| Slice thickness | 0.8 |
| Flip angle | 5 |
| Band width | 50 |
TR – repetition time, TE – echo time, FOV – field of view
Numeric rating score of Eustachian tube cartilage
| Score | Visualisation of Eustachian tube cartilage | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vague outline | |
| 2 | Intermediate definition | |
| 3 | Sharply defined | |
Degeneration grade
| Grade | Cartilage degeneration |
|---|---|
| 0 | No degeneration |
| 1 | Punctuate degeneration |
| 2 | Linear degeneration |
Figure 1Example of grade 0 degeneration. Eustachian tube cartilage (arrow) is shown in oblique parasagittal image
Figure 3Example of grade 2 degeneration. Eustachian tube cartilage (arrow) is shown in oblique parasagittal image
Mean age in patient and control groups
| Patient group | Control group | Statistical analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 44.21 ± 9.36 | 44.08 ± 10.96 |
Gender distribution in patient and control groups
| Gender | Patient group | Control group | Total | Statistical analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 30 (34.9%) | 56 (65.1%) | 86 (100%) | χ2 = 0.08 |
| Male | 26 (37.1%) | 44 (62.9%) | 70 (100%) | |
| Total | 56 (35.9%) | 100 (64.1%) | 156 (100%) |
Mean values of Eustachian tube cartilage medial laminal thickness and median values of Eustachian tube lumen diameter in patient and control groups
| Patient group | Control group | Statistical analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|
| X ± SD | |||
| Thickness | 3.42 ± 0.90 | 3.67 ± 0.73 | |
| Median (min-max) | |||
| Lumen diameter | 0.90 (0.40-2.60) | 1.20 (0.70-3.10) | |
Comparison of Eustachian tube cartilage score and median value of Eustachian tube lumen diameter in patient and control groups
| Score | Median value of lumen diameter in patient group (min-max) | Median value of lumen diameter in control group (min-max) | Statistical analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.85 (0.50-1.20) | 1.15 (0.9-2.30) | |
| 2 | 0.90 (0.40-1.20) | 1.25 (0.90-2.10) | |
| 3 | 0.80 (0.60-2.60) | 1.20 (0.70-3.10) |
Comparison of Eustachian tube cartilage degeneration and mean age in patient and control groups
| Degeneration grade | Mean age in patient group | Mean age in control group | Statistical analysis |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 42.00 ± 6.92 | 43.72 ± 10.54 | |
| 1 | 43.27 ± 11.67 | 44.44 ± 11.06 | |
| 2 | 44.88 ± 8.33 | 43.90 ± 11.29 |