Imaging Science in Dentistry

Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology (대한영상치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Correlations between anatomical variations of the nasal cavity and ethmoidal sinuses on cone-beam computed tomography scans

  • Shokri, Abbas (Dental Implant Research Center, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Hamadan University of Medical Science) ;
  • Faradmal, Mohammad Javad (Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences) ;
  • Hekmat, Bahareh (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, Dental School, Zanjan University of Medical Science)
  • Received : 2018.10.01
  • Accepted : 2019.02.05
  • Published : 2019.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Anatomical variations of the external nasal wall are highly important, since they play a role in obstruction or drainage of the ostiomeatal complex and ventilation and can consequently elevate the risk of pathological sinus conditions. This study aimed to assess anatomical variations of the nasal cavity and ethmoidal sinuses and their correlations on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated CBCT scans of 250 patients, including 107 males and 143 females, to determine the prevalence of anatomical variations of the nasal cavity and ethmoidal sinuses. All images were taken using a New Tom 3G scanner. Data were analyzed using the chi-square test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and the Mann-Whitney test. Results: The most common anatomical variations were found to be nasal septal deviation (90.4%), agger nasi air cell (53.6%), superior orbital cell(47.6%), pneumatized nasal septum(40%), and Onodi air cell(37.2%). Correlations were found between nasal septal deviation and the presence of a pneumatized nasal septum, nasal spur, and Haller cell. No significant associations were noted between the age or sex of patients and the presence of anatomical variations (P>0.05). Conclusion: Radiologists and surgeons must pay close attention to the anatomical variations of the sinonasal region in the preoperative assessment to prevent perioperative complications.

Keywords

References

  1. Koo SK, Kim JD, Moon JS, Jung SH, Lee SH. The incidence of concha bullosa, unusual anatomic variation and its relationship to nasal septal deviation: a retrospective radiologic study. Auris Nasus Larynx 2017; 44: 561-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anl.2017.01.003
  2. Parks ET. Cone beam computed tomography for the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Dent Clin North Am 2014; 58: 627-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2014.04.003
  3. Al-Abri R, Bhargava D, Al-Bassam W, Al-Badaai Y, Sawhney S. Clinically significant anatomical variants of the paranasal sinuses. Oman Med J 2014; 29: 110-3. https://doi.org/10.5001/omj.2014.27
  4. Tao Z, Zhang J, Yang Q, Xiao B, Kong Y. Differences of anatomic variations in ostiomeatal complex between two sides of the deviated septum. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi 2001; 36: 132-4.
  5. Khojastepour L, Mirhadi S, Mesbahi SA. Anatomical variations of ostiomeatal complex in CBCT of patients seeking rhinoplasty. J Dent (Shiraz) 2015; 16: 42-8.
  6. Guldner C, Ningo A, Voigt J, Diogo I, Heinrichs J, Weber R, et al. Potential of dosage reduction in cone-beam-computed tomography (CBCT) for radiological diagnostics of the paranasal sinuses. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2013; 270: 1307-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2177-2
  7. Roman RA, Hedesiu M, Gersak M, Fidan F, Baciut G, Baciut M. Assessing the prevalence of paranasal sinuses anatomical variants in patients with sinusitis using cone beam computer tomography. Clujul Med 2016; 89: 419-21.
  8. White SC, Pharoah MJ. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation. 7th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2014.
  9. Shokri A, Khajeh S. In vitro comparison of the effect of different slice thicknesses on the accuracy of linear measurements on cone beam computed tomography images in implant sites. J Craniofac Surg 2015; 26: 157-60. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001031
  10. Shokri A, Miresmaeili A, Farhadian N, Falah-Kooshki S, Amini P, Mollaie N. Effect of changing the head position on accuracy of transverse measurements of the maxillofacial region made on cone beam computed tomography and conventional posterior-anterior cephalograms. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46: 20160180. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160180
  11. de Miranda CM, de Miranda Maranhao CP, Arraes FM, Padilha IG, de Farias LD, de Araujo Jatoba MS. Anatomical variations of paranasal sinuses at multislice computed tomography: what to look for. Radiol Bras 2011; 44:256-62. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-39842011000400012
  12. Som PM, Curtin HD. Head and neck imaging. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier; 2011.
  13. Dasar U, Gokce E. Evaluation of variations in sinonasal region with computed tomography. World J Radiol 2016; 8: 98-108. https://doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v8.i1.98
  14. Bremke M, Leppek R, Werner JA. Digital volume tomography in ENT medicine. HNO 2010; 58: 823-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-010-2110-1
  15. Kurzweg T, Dalchow CV, Bremke M, Majdani O, Kureck I, Knecht R, et al. The value of digital volume tomography in assessing the position of cochlear implant arrays in temporal bone specimens. Ear Hear 2010; 31: 413-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181d3d6b6
  16. Aramani A, Karadi RN, Kumar S. A study of anatomical variations of osteomeatal complex in chronic rhinosinusitis patients- CT findings. J Clin Diagn Res 2014; 8: KC01-4.
  17. Mamatha H, Shamasundar NM, Bharathi MB, Prasanna LC. Variations of ostiomeatal complex and its applied anatomy: a CT scan study. Indian J Sci Technol 2010; 3: 904-7. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2010/v3i8.17
  18. Adeel M, Rajput MS, Akhter S, Ikram M, Arain A, Khattak YJ. Anatomical variations of nose and para-nasal sinuses; CT scan review. J Pak Med Assoc 2013; 63: 317-9.
  19. Lerdlum S, Vachiranubhap B. Prevalence of anatomic variation demonstrated on screening sinus computed tomography and clinical correlation. J Med Assoc Thai 2005; 88 Suppl 4: S110-5.
  20. Stallman JS, Lobo JN, Som PM. The incidence of concha bullosa and its relationship to nasal septal deviation and paranasal sinus disease. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004; 25: 1613-8.
  21. Earwaker J. Anatomic variants in sinonasal CT. Radiographics 1993; 13: 381-415. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.13.2.8460226
  22. Mathew R, Omami G, Hand A, Fellows D, Lurie A. Cone beam CT analysis of Haller cells: prevalence and clinical significance. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2013; 42: 20130055. https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20130055
  23. Fadda GL, Rosso S, Aversa S, Petrelli A, Ondolo C, Succo G. Multiparametric statistical correlations between paranasal sinus anatomic variations and chronic rhinosinusitis. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2012; 32: 244-51.
  24. Albuquerque CB, Zambrana NR, Zambrana JR, Ribeiro RA, Salgado DM, Costa C. Evaluation of prevalence of Haller cells and their relationship with maxilofacial changes. Clin Lab Res Dent 2018; 54: 1-7.

Cited by

  1. Assessing the Clinical Value of Performing CT Scan before Rhinoplasty Surgery vol.2020, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5929754
  2. Nasal cavities and the nasal septum: Anatomical variants and assessment of features with computed tomography vol.33, pp.4, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1177/1971400920913763
  3. Evaluating the frequency of anatomical variations of the sinonasal region in pediatric and adult age groups according to gender: computed tomography findings of 1532 cases vol.37, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1186/s43163-021-00122-9