Efficacy of sinus ultrasound in diagnosis of acute and subacute maxillary sinusitis

11Citations
Citations of this article
29Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of sinus ultrasound for acute and subacute maxillary sinusitis (ASMS) by investigating the agreement between different tools. We also proposed a confirmatory tool directed protocol for adult acute sinusitis, to enhance diagnostic accuracy. Methods: This prospective cohort study enrolled patients who were older than 18 years, with a diagnosis of maxillary sinusitis. The duration of symptoms was confined to less than 12 weeks. Rigid nasal endoscopy, sinus ultrasound, and plain sinus film were performed for all patients on the same day to confirm the diagnosis. Kappa statistics were used to test interrater reliability. Results: A total of 148 maxillary sinuses in 74 patients (38 men, 36 women) were evaluated. Sinus ultrasound and rigid nasal endoscopy disclosed the best agreement (agreement = 0.78, κ = 0.556). The agreement of rigid nasal endoscopy and plain sinus film was relatively poor (agreement = 0.72, κ = 0.446). Sinus ultrasound and plain sinus film had the poorest diagnostic consistency (agreement = 0.67, κ = 0.338). Conclusion: Sinus ultrasound is a quick, safe, cost effective, and relatively easy-to-use technique for clinicians to evaluate the maxillary sinus. Sinus ultrasound and rigid nasal endoscopy are complementary tests to confirm the diagnosis of ASMS.

Cited by Powered by Scopus

658Citations
537Readers

This article is free to access.

This article is free to access.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hsu, C. C., Sheng, C., & Ho, C. Y. (2018). Efficacy of sinus ultrasound in diagnosis of acute and subacute maxillary sinusitis. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association, 81(10), 898–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcma.2018.03.005

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 9

82%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

9%

Researcher 1

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 8

67%

Engineering 2

17%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

8%

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceut... 1

8%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free