Internal nasal dimensions of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia: comparison between acoustic rhinometry technique and cone-beam computed tomography

xlomafota13 shared this article with you from Inoreader Internal nasal dimensions of children with unilateral cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia: comparison between acoustic rhinometry technique and cone-beam computed tomography Via CoDAS : Sociedade Brasileira de Fonoaudiologia RESUMO Objetivo Comparar a geometria da cavidade nasal de crianças e adolescentes com fissura labiopalatina e deficiência maxilar por meio de dois métodos: a tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico, considerada padrão-ouro, e a rinometria acústica. Método Foram avaliados, de maneira transversal, os exames de tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico e de rinometria acústica, previamente obtidos para fins de planejamento ortodôntico, de 17 crianças e adolescentes com fissura labiopalatina e atresia maxilar. Por meio do programa Dolphin Imaging 11.8, a cavidade nasal das imagens tomográficas foi reconstruída por dois avaliadores e foram obtidos os volumes internos nasais. Por meio da rinometria, os volumes nasais foram aferidos para as regiões V1 e V2. Os valores de cada exame foram, então, comparados, a um nível de significância de 5%. Resultados A análise estatística mostrou alta reprodutibilidade intra e interavaliadores na análise da tomografia comp utadorizada de feixe cônico. Os volumes internos nasais médios (± desvio-padrão), utilizando a rinometria acústica e a tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico corresponderam a 6,6 ± 1,9 cm3 e 8,1 ± 1,5 cm3, respectivamente. A diferença entre os exames foi de 17,7%, considerada estatisticamente significante (p = 0,006). Conclusão Os volumes nasais aferidos pelos dois métodos são diferentes, ou seja, apresentam discrepâncias nas medidas. A técnica considerada padrão-ouro identificou volumes maiores na cavidade nasal. A determinação de qual exame reflete a realidade clínica constitui passo futuro importante. ABSTRACT Purpose To compare the nasal cavity geometry of children and teenagers with cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia by two methods: cone-beam computed tomography, considered the gold standard, and acoustic rhinometry. Methods Data on cone-beam computed tomography and acoustic rhinometry examinations of 17 children and teenagers with cleft lip and palate and maxillary atresia, previously obtained for orthodontic planning purposes, were evaluated prospectively. Using Dolphin Imaging 11.8 software, the nasal cavity was reconstructed by two evaluators, and the internal nasal volumes were obtained. Using rhinometry, the volumes of regions V1 and V2 were measured. The values of each examination were then compared at a significance level of 5%. Results Statistical analysis showed high intra- and inter-rater reproducibility in the cone-beam computed tomography analysis. The mean internal nasal volumes (± standard deviation) obtained using acoustic rhinometry and cone-beam computed tomography corresponded to 6.6 ± 1.9 cm3 and 8.1 ± 1.5 cm3, respectively. The difference between the examinations was 17.7%, which was considered statistically significant (p = 0.006). Conclusion The nasal volumes measured via the two methods were different; that is, they presented discrepancies in the measurements. The gold standard technique ide ntified larger volumes than acoustic rhinometry in the nasal cavity. Therefore, determining which test reflects clinical reality is an essential future step. View on the web Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.