We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Sialoendoscopy, sialography, and ultrasound: a comparison of diagnostic methods.
- Authors
Pniak, Tomáš; Štrympl, Pavel; Staníková, Lucia; Zeleník, Karol; Matoušek, Petr; Komínek, Pavel
- Abstract
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.
- Publication
Open Medicine, 2016, Vol 11, Issue 1, p461
- ISSN
2391-5463
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.1515/med-2016-0081