We have located links that may give you full text access.
Measuring growth of residual cholesteatoma in subtotal petrosectomy.
Acta Oto-laryngologica 2019 March 20
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the growth rate of cholesteatoma in patients.
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the growth of residual cholesteatoma in subtotal petrosectomy based on volume measured in MRI scans.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective case series in a Tertiary Medical Centre. Thirteen residual cholesteatomas were identified in 10 patients after subtotal petrosectomy for which a wait-and-scan policy was adopted. Volume of the residual cholesteatoma was calculated by manual segmentation as well as the 'box method'.
RESULTS: Mean growth rate was 27.9 mm3/month (SD 22.8), with a large individual variation ranging from 2.2 to 69.8 mm3/month. No complications were reported in 10 patients with a wait-and-scan policy for residual cholesteatoma in subtotal petrosectomy. The box method overestimates growth rate compared to the reference method manual segmentation and a linear increase of this systematic error was seen with increasing size of the cholesteatoma.
CONCLUSIONS: Residual cholesteatoma growth rate shows a large individual variation. A wait-and-scan policy could be considered in case of a (small) residual in subtotal petrosectomy with ample room to grow before destroying any remaining structures. Furthermore, the clinically more applicable and less time-consuming box method can be used to accurately measure volumes of small cholesteatomasup to a volume of 500 mm3 .
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the growth of residual cholesteatoma in subtotal petrosectomy based on volume measured in MRI scans.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective case series in a Tertiary Medical Centre. Thirteen residual cholesteatomas were identified in 10 patients after subtotal petrosectomy for which a wait-and-scan policy was adopted. Volume of the residual cholesteatoma was calculated by manual segmentation as well as the 'box method'.
RESULTS: Mean growth rate was 27.9 mm3/month (SD 22.8), with a large individual variation ranging from 2.2 to 69.8 mm3/month. No complications were reported in 10 patients with a wait-and-scan policy for residual cholesteatoma in subtotal petrosectomy. The box method overestimates growth rate compared to the reference method manual segmentation and a linear increase of this systematic error was seen with increasing size of the cholesteatoma.
CONCLUSIONS: Residual cholesteatoma growth rate shows a large individual variation. A wait-and-scan policy could be considered in case of a (small) residual in subtotal petrosectomy with ample room to grow before destroying any remaining structures. Furthermore, the clinically more applicable and less time-consuming box method can be used to accurately measure volumes of small cholesteatomasup to a volume of 500 mm3 .
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app