Search

Introduction Identifying the internal carotid artery (ICA) when managing petroclival and infratemporal fossa pathology is essential for the skull base surgeon. The vidian nerve and eustachian tube (ET) cartilage come together at the foramen lacerum, the vidian--eustachian junction (VEJ). The ICA position, relative to the VEJ is described. Methods Endoscopic dissection of adult fresh-frozen cadaver ICAs and a case series of patients with petroclival pathology were performed. The relationship of the VEJ to the ICA horizontal segment, vertical segment, and second genu was assessed. The distance of the ICA second genu to VEJ was determined in coronal, axial, and sagittal planes. The length of the vidian nerve and ET was measured from the pterygopalatine fossa (PPF) and nasopharyngeal orifice to the VEJ. Results In this study, 10 cadaver dissections (82.3 ± 6.7 years, 40% female) were performed. The horizontal petrous ICA was at or behind VEJ in 100%, above VEJ in 100%, and lateral to VEJ in80%. The vertical paraclival segment was ator behindVEJ in 100%, above in 100%, and medial in 100%. The second genu was at or behind VEJ in 100% (3.3 ± 2.4 mm), at or above in 100%(2.5 ± 1.6mm), andmedial in100%(3.4 ± 2.0mm). The VEJwas successfully used to locate the ICA in nine consecutive patients (53.3 ± 13.6 years, 55.6% female) where pathology was also present. The VEJ was 15.0 ± 6.0 mm from the ET and 17.4 ± 4.1 mm from the PPF. Conclusion The VEJ is an excellent landmark as it defines both superior and posterior limits when isolating the ICA in skull base surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Petrous temporal bone cone-beam computed tomography scans help aid diagnosis and accurate identification of key operative landmarks in temporal bone and mastoid surgery. Our primary objective was to determine the accuracy of using a deep learning convolutional neural network algorithm to augment identification of structures on petrous temporal bone cone-beam computed tomography. Our secondary objective was to compare the accuracy of convolutional neural network structure identification when trained by a senior versus junior clinician. METHODS: A total of 129 petrous temporal bone cone-beam computed tomography scans were obtained from an Australian public tertiary hospital. Key intraoperative landmarks were labeled in 68 scans using bounding boxes on axial and coronal slices at the level of the malleoincudal joint by an otolaryngology registrar and board-certified otolaryngologist. Automated structure identification was performed on axial and coronal slices of the remaining 61 scans using a convolutional neural network (Microsoft Custom Vision) trained using the labeled dataset. Convolutional neural network structure identification accuracy was manually verified by an otolaryngologist, and accuracy when trained by the registrar and otolaryngologist labeled datasets respectively was compared. RESULTS: The convolutional neural network was able to perform automated structure identification in petrous temporal bone cone-beam computed tomography scans with a high degree of accuracy in both axial (0.958) and coronal (0.924) slices (P < .001). Convolutional neural network accuracy was proportionate to the seniority of the training clinician in structures with features more difficult to distinguish on single slices such as the cochlea, vestibule, and carotid canal. CONCLUSION: Convolutional neural networks can perform automated structure identification in petrous temporal bone cone-beam computed tomography scans with a high degree of accuracy, with the performance being proportionate to the seniority of the training clinician. Training of the convolutional neural network by the most senior clinician is desirable to maximize the accuracy of the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Pneumatization of the mastoid process is variable and of significance to the operative surgeon. Surgical approaches to the temporal bone require an understanding of pneumatization and its implications for surgical access. This study aims to determine the feasibility of using deep learning convolutional neural network algorithms to classify pneumatization of the mastoid process. METHODS: De-identified petrous temporal bone images were acquired from a tertiary hospital radiology picture archiving and communication system. A binary classification mode in the pretrained convolutional neural network was used to investigate the utility of convolutional neural networks in temporal bone imaging. False positive and negative images were reanalyzed by the investigators and qualitatively assessed to consider reasons for inaccuracy. RESULTS: The overall accuracy of the model was 0.954. At a probability threshold of 65%, the sensitivity of the model was 0.860 (95% CI 0.783-0.934) and the specificity was 0.989 (95% CI 0.960-0.999). The positive predictive value was 0.973 (95% CI 0.904-0.993) and the negative predictive value was 0.935 (95% CI 0.901-0.965). The false positive rate was 0.006. The F1 number was 0.926 demonstrating a high accuracy for the model. CONCLUSION: The temporal bone is a complex anatomical region of interest to otolaryngologists. Surgical planning requires high-resolution computed tomography scans, the interpretation of which can be augmented with machine learning. This initial study demonstrates the feasibility of utilizing machine learning algorithms to discriminate anatomical variation with a high degree of accuracy. It is hoped this will lead to further investigation regarding more complex anatomical structures in the temporal bone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Since fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, there has been increasing controversy about the use of both topical and systemic antifungal agents in its management. Although interaction between the immune system and fungus has been demonstrated in CRS, this does not necessarily imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective its management., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 8 March 2011., Selection Criteria: All randomised, placebo-controlled trials considering the use of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS and allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS). CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) or American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) criteria., Data Collection and Analysis: We reviewed the titles and abstracts of all studies obtained from the searches and selected trials that met the eligibility criteria. We extracted data using a pre-determined data extraction form. There was significant heterogeneity of outcome data reporting with reports containing both parametric and non-parametric representations of data for the same outcomes. Means and standard deviations for change data were unavailable for a number of trials. Due to the limited reported data, we contacted authors and used original data for data analysis., Main Results: Six studies were included (380 participants). Five studies investigated topical antifungals and one study investigated systemic antifungals. The risk of bias in all included studies was low, with all trials being double-blinded and randomised. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo for any outcome. Symptom scores in fact statistically favoured the placebo group. Adverse event reporting was statistically significantly higher in the antifungal group., Authors' Conclusions: On the basis of this meta-analysis, there is no evidence to support the use of either topical or systemic antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.

Background: Topical corticosteroid is used as part of a comprehensive medical treatment for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) without polyps. Nevertheless, there is insufficient evidence to show a clear overall benefit. Trials studying the efficacy of topical corticosteroid use various delivery methods in patients who have or have not had sinus surgery, which directly impacts on topical delivery and distribution., Objectives: To assess the effects of topical steroid in patients with CRS without nasal polyps and perform a meta-analysis of symptom improvement data, including subgroup analysis by sinus surgery status and topical delivery methods., Search Strategy: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ISRCTN and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 9 July 2010., Selection Criteria: All randomised trials in which a topically administered corticosteroid was compared with either a placebo, no treatment or alternative topically administered corticosteroid for the treatment of CRS without polyps in patients of any age., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors reviewed the search results and selected trials meeting the eligibility criteria, obtaining full texts and contacting authors where necessary. We documented our justification for the exclusion of studies. Two authors extracted data using a pre-determined standardised data form., Main Results: Ten studies (590 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The trials were of low (six trials) and medium (four trials) risk of bias. The primary outcome was sino-nasal symptoms. When compared to placebo, topical steroid improved symptom scores (standardised mean difference -0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.60 to -0.13, P = 0.002; five trials, n = 286) and had a greater proportion of responders (risk ratio 1.69; 95% CI 1.21 to 2.37, P = 0.002; four trials, n = 263). With a limited number of studies, the subgroup analyses of patients who had received sinus surgery versus those who had not was not significant (P = 0.35). Subgroup analyses by topical delivery method revealed more benefit when steroid was administered directly to the sinuses than with simple nasal delivery (P = 0.04). There were no differences between groups for quality of life and adverse events., Authors' Conclusions: Topical steroid is a beneficial treatment for CRS without polyps and the adverse effects are minor. It may be included in a comprehensive treatment of CRS without polyps. Direct delivery of steroid to the sinuses may bring more beneficial effect. Further studies comparing different topical drug delivery methods to the sinuses, with appropriate treatment duration (longer than 12 weeks), are required.

Background: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an inflammatory disorder of the nose and sinuses. Since fungi were postulated as a potential cause of CRS in the late 1990s, there has been increasing controversy about the use of both topical and systemic antifungal agents in its management. Although interaction between the immune system and fungus has been demonstrated in CRS, this does not necessarily imply that fungi are the cause of CRS or that antifungals will be effective its management., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS., Search Strategy: We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the most recent search was 8 March 2011., Selection Criteria: All randomised, placebo-controlled trials considering the use of topical or systemic antifungal therapy in the treatment of CRS and allergic fungal sinusitis (AFS). CRS was defined using either the European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) or American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) criteria., Data Collection and Analysis: We reviewed the titles and abstracts of all studies obtained from the searches and selected trials that met the eligibility criteria. We extracted data using a pre-determined data extraction form. There was significant heterogeneity of outcome data reporting with reports containing both parametric and non-parametric representations of data for the same outcomes. Means and standard deviations for change data were unavailable for a number of trials. Due to the limited reported data, we contacted authors and used original data for data analysis., Main Results: Six studies were included (380 participants). Five studies investigated topical antifungals and one study investigated systemic antifungals. The risk of bias in all included studies was low, with all trials being double-blinded and randomised. Pooled meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit of topical or systemic antifungals over placebo for any outcome. Symptom scores in fact statistically favoured the placebo group. Adverse event reporting was statistically significantly higher in the antifungal group., Authors' Conclusions: On the basis of this meta-analysis, there is no evidence to support the use of either topical or systemic antifungal treatment in the management of CRS.