Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 3-dimensional inner ear visualization by volume rendering of high-resolution magnetic resonance data in patients with clinically suspected inner ear abnormality. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study of different postprocessing techniques, based on blinded film readings. SETTING: Tertiary referral hospital. SUBJECTS: Fifty patients (17 females and 33 males) aged 1 to 77 years (average age, 42 years) with sensorineural hearing loss, vertigo, and/or tinnitus. INTERVENTION: Postprocessing of magnetic resonance data to inner ear reconstructions by the use of volume rendering as well as maximum-intensity projection; caloric testing by electronystagmography. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Film was read blindly by 4 radiologists using a 5-point parameter scale for image quality and diagnostic value. The assessibility of inner ear subsegments was evaluated. The specificity of volume-rendered reconstructions for detecting semicircular canal obliterations was assessed in a subgroup of 9 patients by caloric testing. The time required for data postprocessing as well as film reading was recorded by means of a stopwatch. RESULTS: Volume-rendered inner ear reconstructions were superior in image quality (P<.001), diagnostic value (P<.001), subsegment inner ear assessment (P<.01 to P<.001), and film reading time (P<.001) compared with maximum-intensity projections. The data postprocessing time was comparable for both techniques. Caloric weakness was noted in all patients assessed by electronystagmography. CONCLUSION: Volume rendering is the postprocessing technique of choice for 3-dimensional inner ear visualization, performing better than maximum-intensity projections with respect to various parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klingebiel et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: