Clinical audit of ultrasonography for detecting sialoliths in the submandibular gland in paediatric patients: A comparison to computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging

Takahiro Hosokawa, Yutaka Tanami, Yumiko Sato, Nodoka Adachi, Hiroshi Asanuma, Eiji Oguma
{"title":"Clinical audit of ultrasonography for detecting sialoliths in the submandibular gland in paediatric patients: A comparison to computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging","authors":"Takahiro Hosokawa,&nbsp;Yutaka Tanami,&nbsp;Yumiko Sato,&nbsp;Nodoka Adachi,&nbsp;Hiroshi Asanuma,&nbsp;Eiji Oguma","doi":"10.1002/ajum.12370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>To compare the performance of ultrasonography with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for detecting submandibular sialoliths.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Thirteen patients with suspected submandibular sialoliths who underwent ultrasonography and CT or MRI were included. Sialoliths were diagnosed using CT (11 cases) or MRI (two cases). The submandibular duct was classified into distal and proximal ducts based on the point around the mylohyoid muscle. Sialoliths located in the proximal duct were difficult to differentiate from those located within the submandibular gland (SMG). Therefore, the location of the sialoliths was classified as follows: within the SMG/proximal duct and within the distal duct. The ultrasound results were compared with CT/MRI results.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the 13 patients included, two had sialoliths in both the SMG/proximal duct and the distal duct, three had sialoliths in the SMG/proximal duct, and five had sialoliths in the distal duct on CT or MRI. In this small cohort, all five sialoliths in the SMG/proximal duct were detected by ultrasoonography; however, of the seven cases with sialoliths located in the distal duct, only three could be detected by ultrasonography.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The incidence of sialoliths in the distal duct was higher than that in the SMG/proximal duct. Ultrasonography showed a good performance compared with CT/MRI in the SMG/proximal duct but not in the distal duct.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36517,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","volume":"27 1","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajum.12370","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the performance of ultrasonography with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) for detecting submandibular sialoliths.

Methods

Thirteen patients with suspected submandibular sialoliths who underwent ultrasonography and CT or MRI were included. Sialoliths were diagnosed using CT (11 cases) or MRI (two cases). The submandibular duct was classified into distal and proximal ducts based on the point around the mylohyoid muscle. Sialoliths located in the proximal duct were difficult to differentiate from those located within the submandibular gland (SMG). Therefore, the location of the sialoliths was classified as follows: within the SMG/proximal duct and within the distal duct. The ultrasound results were compared with CT/MRI results.

Results

Of the 13 patients included, two had sialoliths in both the SMG/proximal duct and the distal duct, three had sialoliths in the SMG/proximal duct, and five had sialoliths in the distal duct on CT or MRI. In this small cohort, all five sialoliths in the SMG/proximal duct were detected by ultrasoonography; however, of the seven cases with sialoliths located in the distal duct, only three could be detected by ultrasonography.

Conclusions

The incidence of sialoliths in the distal duct was higher than that in the SMG/proximal duct. Ultrasonography showed a good performance compared with CT/MRI in the SMG/proximal duct but not in the distal duct.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于检测儿科患者颌下腺霰粒肿的超声波检查临床审核:与计算机断层扫描和磁共振成像的比较
目的:比较超声与磁共振成像(MRI)和计算机断层扫描(CT)对颌下腺结石的检测效果。13例疑似颌下腺结石患者均行超声、CT或MRI检查。通过CT(11例)或MRI(2例)诊断唾液结石。根据下颌舌骨肌周围的点将下颌下导管分为远端和近端。位于近端导管的涎石与位于颌下腺(SMG)内的涎石很难区分。因此,涎石的位置分为:SMG/近端导管内和远端导管内。将超声结果与CT/MRI结果进行比较。在纳入的13例患者中,2例在SMG/近端导管和远端导管中均有唾液结石,3例在SMG/近端导管中有唾液结石,5例在CT或MRI上在远端导管中有唾液结石。在这个小队列中,超声检查了SMG/近端导管中的所有5个唾液结石;然而,在7例涎石位于远端导管中,只有3例可以通过超声检测到。远端导管涎石的发生率高于SMG/近端导管。超声检查在SMG/近端导管中表现良好,而在远端导管中表现不佳。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine
Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊最新文献
Issue Information The impact of ultrasound imaging on patient management – Let's practice the evidence EUS‐guided tissue acquisition from gastric subepithelial lesions—The optimal technique still remains undecided Ultrasound‐assisted and landmark‐based nusinersen delivery in spinal muscular atrophy adults: A retrospective analysis Cutaneous ultrasound in the diagnosis and assessment of inflammatory activity in tinea capitis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1