Kao-Tsung Lin1, Chi-Ju Lu2, Yi-Ho Young3. 1. Department of Otolaryngology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. 2. Department of Medical Imaging, National Taiwan University Hospital Yunlin Branch, Yunlin County, Taiwan. 3. Department of Otolaryngology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. Electronic address: youngyh@ntu.edu.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: This study utilized the recently advanced technique in MR imaging to establish its role on diagnosing all types of endolymphatic hydrops (EH). METHODS: Twenty-two patients (26 ears) with clinical EH were admitted due to acute hearing loss and/or vertiginous attack. Each patient underwent an inner ear test battery comprising audiometry, cervical and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential tests, and caloric test, followed by MR imaging for confirmation. RESULTS: Of the 22 clinical EH patients, 12 patients were referred to primary EH (Meniere's disease), 8 patients were secondary EH (including delayed EH in 5), and 2 patients were EH of embryopathic origin. MR imaging of 26 affected ears demonstrated EH in the cochlea only for 14 ears, in the utricle and saccule only for 1 ear, and in all three endorgans for 3 ears, accounting for a sensitivity of 69% (18/26). The 8 affected ears showing negative MR images were EH patients with hearing recovery 1, just after vertiginous attack 3, and chronic low-tone hearing loss 4. In contrast, 3 out of 18 unaffected ears demonstrated asymptomatic EH in the cochlea, representing a specificity of 83% (15/18). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and specificity of MR imaging for confirming all types of EH were 69% and 83%, respectively. Although diagnostic criteria can identify primary and delayed EH, MR imaging may provide a supplementary tool for diagnosing secondary, embryopathic, or asymptomatic EH, if patients are not with hearing recovery, chronic low-tone hearing loss, or just after vertiginous attack.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: This study utilized the recently advanced technique in MR imaging to establish its role on diagnosing all types of endolymphatic hydrops (EH). METHODS: Twenty-two patients (26 ears) with clinical EH were admitted due to acute hearing loss and/or vertiginous attack. Each patient underwent an inner ear test battery comprising audiometry, cervical and ocular vestibular-evoked myogenic potential tests, and caloric test, followed by MR imaging for confirmation. RESULTS: Of the 22 clinical EH patients, 12 patients were referred to primary EH (Meniere's disease), 8 patients were secondary EH (including delayed EH in 5), and 2 patients were EH of embryopathic origin. MR imaging of 26 affected ears demonstrated EH in the cochlea only for 14 ears, in the utricle and saccule only for 1 ear, and in all three endorgans for 3 ears, accounting for a sensitivity of 69% (18/26). The 8 affected ears showing negative MR images were EH patients with hearing recovery 1, just after vertiginous attack 3, and chronic low-tone hearing loss 4. In contrast, 3 out of 18 unaffected ears demonstrated asymptomatic EH in the cochlea, representing a specificity of 83% (15/18). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity and specificity of MR imaging for confirming all types of EH were 69% and 83%, respectively. Although diagnostic criteria can identify primary and delayed EH, MR imaging may provide a supplementary tool for diagnosing secondary, embryopathic, or asymptomatic EH, if patients are not with hearing recovery, chronic low-tone hearing loss, or just after vertiginous attack.