Sialoendoscopy, sialography, and ultrasound: a comparison of diagnostic methods

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00843989%3A_____%2F16%3AE0105901" target="_blank" >RIV/00843989:_____/16:E0105901 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2016-0081" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2016-0081</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/med-2016-0081" target="_blank" >10.1515/med-2016-0081</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Sialoendoscopy, sialography, and ultrasound: a comparison of diagnostic methods

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objective: To compare the accuracy of ultrasound, sialography, and sialendoscopy for examining benign salivary gland obstructions. Methods: In this prospective study, patients with symptoms of obstruction of the major salivary gland duct system presenting at the ENT Clinic University Hospital, Ostrava, from June 2010 to December 2013 were included. All patients (n=76) underwent ultrasound, sialography, and sialoendoscopy. The signs of sialolithiasis, ductal stenosis, or normal findings were recorded after the examinations. Statistical analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of all the methods was performed, as well as a comparison of the accuracy of each method for different kinds of pathology (sialolithiasis or stenosis). Results: The sensitivity of ultrasound, sialography, and sialoendoscopy for sialolithiasis findings were 71.9%, 86.7 %, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity of sialography and sialoendoscopy for stenosis of the duct was 69.0%, and 100%, respectively. The study showed impossibility of ultrasonic diagnostics of ductal stenosis. The sensitivity of sialoendoscopy for both pathologies was significantly higher than that from ultrasound or sialography (p<0.05). The specificity of sialoendoscopy was significantly higher than that from by ultrasound or sialography (p<0.05). Conclusion: Sialoendoscopy was the most accurate method for examination ductal pathology, with significantly higher sensitivity and specificity than by ultrasound or sialography.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Sialoendoscopy, sialography, and ultrasound: a comparison of diagnostic methods

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objective: To compare the accuracy of ultrasound, sialography, and sialendoscopy for examining benign salivary gland obstructions. Methods: In this prospective study, patients with symptoms of obstruction of the major salivary gland duct system presenting at the ENT Clinic University Hospital, Ostrava, from June 2010 to December 2013 were included. All patients (n=76) underwent ultrasound, sialography, and sialoendoscopy. The signs of sialolithiasis, ductal stenosis, or normal findings were recorded after the examinations. Statistical analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of all the methods was performed, as well as a comparison of the accuracy of each method for different kinds of pathology (sialolithiasis or stenosis). Results: The sensitivity of ultrasound, sialography, and sialoendoscopy for sialolithiasis findings were 71.9%, 86.7 %, and 100%, respectively. The sensitivity of sialography and sialoendoscopy for stenosis of the duct was 69.0%, and 100%, respectively. The study showed impossibility of ultrasonic diagnostics of ductal stenosis. The sensitivity of sialoendoscopy for both pathologies was significantly higher than that from ultrasound or sialography (p<0.05). The specificity of sialoendoscopy was significantly higher than that from by ultrasound or sialography (p<0.05). Conclusion: Sialoendoscopy was the most accurate method for examination ductal pathology, with significantly higher sensitivity and specificity than by ultrasound or sialography.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

FF - ORL, oftalmologie, stomatologie

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/NT13505" target="_blank" >NT13505: Postavení sialendoskopie ve vyšetřování a léčbě nemocí slinných žláz</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Open Medicine

ISSN

2391-5463

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

11

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

n. 1

Stát vydavatele periodika

PL - Polská republika

Počet stran výsledku

4

Strana od-do

"p. 461-464"

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—