» Articles » PMID: 12961070

[Imaging Diagnosis of Medial and Lateral Orbital Wall Fractures. Sonography Versus Computed Tomography]

Overview
Date 2003 Sep 10
PMID 12961070
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of a curved array scanner in the diagnosis of medial and lateral orbital wall fractures.

Material And Methods: Fifty-three patients with the clinical diagnosis of an orbital trauma were investigated prospectively within a period of 16 months by CT and ultrasonography. The intraoperative findings were used as a reference.

Results: CT reached a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 96% in the diagnosis of medial orbital wall fractures, while ultrasound yielded a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 96%. There was no significant difference found between CT and ultrasonography ( p=0.402). In the investigation of lateral orbital wall fractures, CT reached a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 87%, while ultrasonography yielded a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 95%. Ultrasonography achieved significantly better results than CT ( p=0.008).

Conclusion: The ultrasound investigation with a curved array scanner could be used as an additional method in the diagnosis of medial and lateral orbital wall fractures. Further technical improvements of the transducers need to be developed to increase the sensitivity of ultrasound in the diagnosis of medial orbital wall fractures.

Citing Articles

A comparable study of the diagnostic performance of orbital ultrasonography and CBCT in patients with suspected orbital floor fractures.

Johari M, Ghavimi M, Mahmoudian H, Javadrashid R, Mirakhor Samani S, Fouladi D Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2016; 45(6):20150311.

PMID: 27074346 PMC: 5124768. DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20150311.


[Interobserver variation of the sonographic diagnosis of orbital floor fractures and fractures of the infraorbital margin].

Jank S, Deibl M, Strobl H, Oberrauch A, Nicasi A, Missmann M Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2004; 8(6):337-43.

PMID: 15503239 DOI: 10.1007/s10006-004-0571-7.


[Sonography as a training tool for screening of dubious midfacial fractures].

Heiland M, Lenard M, Schmelzle R, Friedrich R Mund Kiefer Gesichtschir. 2004; 8(4):244-9.

PMID: 15293120 DOI: 10.1007/s10006-004-0535-y.

References
1.
Benateau H, Chevallier E, Hamon M, Edy E, Keswani R, Labbe D . [The three-dimensional spiral scanner and volume rendering technique: importance in craniofacial traumatology and reconstructive surgery]. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac. 2002; 103(4):233-8. View

2.
Grove Jr A, Tadmor R, NEW P, MOMOSE K . Orbital fracture evaluation by coronal computed tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 1978; 85(5 Pt 1):679-85. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(14)77105-3. View

3.
Dorobisz H, Voegeli E, Hardt N . [Conventional radiology and computed tomography in facial fractures]. Rontgenblatter. 1983; 36(12):428-33. View

4.
Berardo N, Leban S, WILLIAMS F . A comparison of radiographic treatment methods for evaluation of the orbit. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988; 46(10):844-9. DOI: 10.1016/0278-2391(88)90047-x. View

5.
Klinger M, Danter J, Siegert R . [Ultrasound diagnosis of orbital floor fractures: an alternative to computerized tomography?]. Laryngorhinootologie. 1996; 75(4):242-6. DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-997569. View