Volumetric analysis of the maxillary sinus in rhinosinusitis patients

Introduction Rhinosinusitis (RS) is an extremely common condition. It causes significant physical symptoms, negatively affects quality of life, and can substantially impair daily functioning. The RS incidence of in the maxillary sinus (MS) is comparatively high. Therefore, computed tomography (CT) o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Physica medica Vol. 32; pp. 335 - 336
Main Authors: Giacomini, Guilherme, de Oliveira, Marcela, Menegatti Pavan, Ana Luiza, Bacchim Neto, Fernando Antônio, Yamashita, Seizo, Carrasco Altemani, João Maurício, de Pina, Diana Rodrigues
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier Ltd 01-09-2016
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Introduction Rhinosinusitis (RS) is an extremely common condition. It causes significant physical symptoms, negatively affects quality of life, and can substantially impair daily functioning. The RS incidence of in the maxillary sinus (MS) is comparatively high. Therefore, computed tomography (CT) of the sinuses is recommended for diagnostic and management purposes. Volume values for MS can be helpful in evaluating the RS, treatment planning and evaluation of the outcome. However, this is not always possible in the clinical routine, and if possible, it involves much effort and/or time. Purpose The aim of this study was to develop an automatic tool to quantity the volume of MS and MS free air in CT exams of patients with rhinosinusitis. Materials and methods The research involved 30 patients. The tool for automatic MS quantification, developed in Matlab, uses a hybrid method, combining watershed and region growing techniques. Our results were compared with radiologist manual segmentation. Results From the comparison, the linear regression showed a strong association and low dispersion. The Bland–Altman analyses showed no significant differences (95% confidence interval). The mean percentage difference between both methods was 9.2% and 10.4% for MS and MS free-air volumes, respectively. Conclusion In conclusion, the developed tool to quantify MS volume proved to be robust, fast and efficient, when compared with manual segmentation. Furthermore, it avoids the intra and inter-observer variations caused by manual and semi-automatic methods. Thus, it may be useful in the diagnosis and treatment determination of RS, providing additional information to physician. Disclosure The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
ISSN:1120-1797
1724-191X
DOI:10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.07.251