Retrolabyrinthine Bone Thickness as a Radiologic Marker for the Hypoplastic Endotype in Menière Disease

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Menière disease (MD) manifests in 2 major endotypes: one with a hypoplastic, underdeveloped endolymphatic sac (MD-hp) and the other with a normally developed sac that degenerates over time (MD-dg). Determining the specific endotype in patients is important for predicting disease progression, tailoring patient counseling, and optimizing treatment strategies. Endotype diagnosis involves measuring an angular trajectory of the vestibular aqueduct (ATVA), with an ATVA ≥140° indicative of MD-hp and an ATVA ≤120° of MD-dg. However, assessing the ATVA can be challenging. This study aimed to explore the link between ATVA and the thickness of the retrolabyrinthine bone as an alternative diagnostic measure that could provide differentiation between MD endotypes using CT and MR imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of CT temporal bone imaging from 32 adult patients with definite MD (60 ears) and 33 age-matched controls without MD or other inner ear symptoms (61 ears) was performed. The ATVA and retrolabyrinthine bone thickness were measured using uniform methodology on standardized axial CT images. Comparative analyses were performed to determine the correlation between ATVA and retrolabyrinthine bone thickness. Additionally, from a separate cohort of 11 patients (22 ears), CT and MR examinations of the temporal bone were retrospectively reviewed for retrolabyrinthine bone thickness measurements, to verify the correlation across the 2 modalities. RESULTS: The average retrolabyrinthine bone thickness was statistically significantly different between MD endotypes, being a mean of 0.8 (SD, 0.3) mm in patients with MD-hp (ATVA ≥140°) and 2.0 (SD, 0.9) mm in patients with MD-dg (ATVA ≤120°), with a consistent pattern of thin retrolabyrinthine bone in MD-hp and variable thickness in MD-dg. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis within the MD cohort revealed that a retrolabyrinthine bone thickness ≥1.2 mm effectively rules out MD-hp. Excellent interrater reliability was noted for the retrolabyrinthine measurement, and there was near-perfect correlation between CT and MR measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Retrolabyrinthine bone thickness proved to be a useful and straightforward alternative marker for distinguishing MD endotypes, being particularly useful for excluding MD-hp. Including information on retrolabyrinthine bone thickness should be considered a routine part of reporting in the context of MD imaging.