Ethnic Variation of Sinonasal Anatomy on CT Scan and Volumetric Analysis
- 13 Downloads
To determine Ethnic differences in the frequency of the relatively common anatomical variants along with difference in anatomy of sinonasal region with surgical importance. A study was conducted to determine the frequency of anatomical variants, volumes of paranasal sinuses using computed tomography and to identify any difference between Group A consisting of people of Indian subcontinent and Group B consisting of people from north east Asian region. Volumetric analysis done using cumulative of area multiplied by slice thickness. The results were compared using Chi square test, p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Among the common and uncommon anatomical variants (Agger nasi, pneumatized uncinate, concha bullosa etc.) there was no significant difference between the two groups. In both the groups Keros Type 1 was the most common type of ethmoid roof seen. On volumetric analysis sphenoid sinus volume was found to be higher in Indians without mongoloid features. Hence it’s ideal that in this era of endoscopic sinus surgery we tailor make approaches to address individual anatomical variation.
KeywordsParanasal sinuses Anatomic variation Ethnic CT-scan Volumetric analysis
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Approval from institutional ethical committee.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Stammberger H (1991) Functional endoscopic sinus surgery: the Messerklinger technique. B.C. Decker, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 5.Badia L, Lund VJ, Wei W (2005) Ethnic variation in sinonasal anatomy on CT scanning. Rhinology 43:210–214Google Scholar
- 10.Adeel M, Rajput MS, Akhter S, Ikram M, Arain A, Khattak YJ (2013) Anatomical variantions of nose and paranasal sinuses; CT scan review. J Pak Med Assoc 63(3):317–319Google Scholar
- 12.Tonai A, Baba S (1996) Anatomic variations of the bone in sinonasal CT. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 525:9–13Google Scholar
- 13.Moulin G, Dessi P, Chagnaud C et al (1994) Dehiscence of the lamina papyracea of the ethmoid bone: CT findings. Am J Neuroradiol 15(1):151–153Google Scholar
- 17.Chow JM, Mafee MF (1989) Radiological assessment preoperative to endoscopic sinus surgery. Otolaryngolclin North Am 22(4):691–701Google Scholar
- 20.Paber J, Cabato M, Villarta R (2008) Hernandez J radiographic analysis of the Ethmoid roof based on KEROS classification among Filipinos. Philipp J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 23(1):15–19Google Scholar
- 21.Sahin C, Yılmaz Y, Titiz A et al (2007) Türk Toplumunda Etmoid C, atı ve Kafa Tabanı Analizi. KBB ve BBC Dergisi 15:1–6Google Scholar
- 27.Kawarai Y, Fukushima K, Ogawa T, Nishizaki K, Gunduz M, Fujimoto M et al (1999) Volume quantification of healthy paranasal cavity by threedimensional CT imaging. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 540:45–49Google Scholar
- 28.Yonetsu K, Watanabe M, Nakamura T (2000) Age-related expansion and reduction in aeration of the sphenoid sinus: volume assessment by helical CT scanning. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 21:179–182Google Scholar
- 31.Dessi P, Castro F, Triglia JM et al (1994) Major complications of sinus surgery: a review of 1192 procedures. J Laryngol Otol 108:212–215Google Scholar