Evaluation of Anatomical Variations in Ostiomeatal Unit by Computed Tomography

  • Sushilkumar Kale Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis
  • K Preetha Junior Resident III, Department of Radiodiagnosis
Keywords: Computed tomography, Ethmoid bulla, Functional endoscopic sinus surgery, Ostiomeatal unit, Pneumatization, Uncinate process

Abstract

Introduction: The ostiomeatal unit has a lot of anatomical variations. Evaluation of these variations is important in patients who undergo computed tomography (CT) scan for their Rhinological complaints. These anatomical variants are responsible for chronic ailments like rhinosinusitis, and their knowledge is essential to not only reduce complications during procedures like functional endoscopic sinus surgery but also to explain the disease recurrence and allow surgeons to decide their operative approach.
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluates and determine the incidence of anatomical variations of ostiomeatal unit on CT and to assess the relation of these variations with sinonasal mucosal diseases.
Materials and Methods: This is a prospective cross-sectional study done at the Department of Radiodiagnosis in a tertiary care center over a period of 24 months with 100 subjects having sinonasal complaints which were referred from various departments for CT scan.
Results: The attachment of the uncinate process had many variations with attachment to the lamina papyracea being 84%, attachment to the skull in 8%, attachment to the middle turbinate in 6%, and free lying in 2%. The uncinate process pneumatization was seen in 6% cases. Giant ethmoid bullae were noted in 11% cases while hypoplastic ethmoid bullae were seen in 4%. In terms of association with sinusitis, only uncinate process pneumatization was found to have a significant statistical association.
Conclusion: The most common ostiomeatal unit anatomical variant was varied attachment of the uncinate process. The least common variant noted was the uncinate process pneumatization; however, only this variant was found to have a positive correlation with sinusitis in comparison to other ostiomeatal unit variants.

Author Biographies

Sushilkumar Kale, Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis

Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sevagram, Wardha, Maharashtra, India

K Preetha, Junior Resident III, Department of Radiodiagnosis

Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sevagram, Wardha, Maharashtra, India

References

1. Julkunen A, Terna E, Numminen J, Markkola A, Dastidar P, Karjalainen M,
et al. Inter-observer agreement of paranasal sinus computed tomography
scans. Acta Otolaryngol 2017;137:611-7.
2. Sargi ZB, Casiano RR. Chapter 2: Surgical anatomy of the paranasal
sinuses. In: Kountakis SE, Önerci M, editors. Rhinologic and Sleep Apnea
Surgical Techniques. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2007.
p. 21.
3. Laine FJ, Smoker WR. The ostiomeatal unit and endoscopic surgery:
Anatomy, variations, and imaging findings in inflammatory diseases. AJR
Am J Roentgenol 1992;159:849-57.
4. Devi MA, Dev B. Pictorial essay: Anatomical variations of paranasal
sinuses on multidetector computed tomography-how does it help FESS
surgeons? Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging; 2012;22:317-324.
DOI: 10.4103/0971-3026.111486.
5. Dua K, Chopra H, Khurana A, Munjal M. CT scan variations in chronic
sinusitis. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2005;15:315.
6. Mamatha H, Shamasundar NM, Bharathi MB, Prasanna LC. Variations of
ostiomeatal complex and its applied anatomy: A CT scan study. Indian J Sci
Technol 2010;3. Available from: http://www.indjst.org/index.php/indjst/
article/view/29907. [Last accessed on 2010 Aug 01].
7. Arun G, Moideen SP, Mohan M, Afroze AK, Thampy AS. Anatomical
variations in superior attachment of uncinate process and localization
of frontal sinus outflow tract. Int J Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg
2017;3:176-9.
8. Landsberg R, Friedman M. A computer-assisted anatomical study of the
nasofrontal region. Laryngoscope 2001;111:2125-30.
9. Adeel M, Rajput MS, Akhter S, Ikram M, Arain A, Khattak YJ. Anatomical
variations of nose and para-nasal sinuses; CT scan review. J Pak Med Assoc
2013;63:317-9.
10. Kumar R, Lingaiah N, Puttaraj NC, Chikkaswamy HA, Kumar P,
Nagarajaiah C, et al. Anatomical variations of paranasal sinuses on coronal
CT-scan in subjects with complaints pertaining to PNS. Int J Anatony
Radiol Sci 2016;5:1-7.
11. Leunig A, Betz CS, Sommer B, Sommer F. Anatomic variations of the
sinuses; multiplanar CT-analysis in 641 patients. Laryngorhinootologie
2008;87:482-9.
12. Amita K, Manoj M, Amarjit K, Navkiran K, Jasvir S, Samrin H. Computed tomographic evaluation of anatomical variants of paranasal sinuses in
sinusitis. Int J Adv Res 2017;5:1515-21. Available from: http://www.
journalijar.com/article/15314/computed-tomographic-evaluation-ofanatomical-
variants-of-paranasal-sinuses-in-sinusitis.
13. Ahmed MA, Kanmadi S. Role of computed tomography in evaluation of
congenital anatomical variations in paranasal sinuses. Int J Biol Med Res
2015;6:4775-81.
14. Earwaker J. Anatomic variants in sinonasal CT. Radio Graphics
1993;13:381-415.
15. Fadda GL, Rosso S, Aversa S, Petrelli A, Ondolo C, Succo G. Multiparametric
statistical correlations between paranasal sinus anatomic variations and
chronic rhinosinusitis. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2012;2:244-51.
16. Dasar U, Gokce E. Evaluation of variations in sinonasal region with
computed tomography. World J Radiol 2016;8:98-108.
Published
2021-10-05