RESUMO
The purpose of the study was to evaluate prevalence, characteristic symptoms, and management of Chiari Malformation 1 (CM1). A retrospective chat review was made in Otology Tertiary Department including 439 otologic patients referred to the Helsinki University Hospital Radiology Department for head magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during 2005 and also among 42 patients seen at the Department of Neurosurgery in years 2001-2005 with a diagnosis of CM1. We made a structured analysis of medical records focusing on patient history, neurologic symptoms, and radiologic findings. For surgical patients, information was collected on symptoms, treatment, and operative outcome. The prevalence of CM1 in the 439 otologic patients was 0.9%. Most CM1 patients sent to the Neurosurgery Department were operated on. Two months postoperatively, 26 patients (68%) had benefited from the surgery, but 12 patients (32%) experienced no change to symptoms. The possibility of CM1 should be borne in mind in patients presenting with atypical benign positional vertigo or recurrent facial paresis.
Assuntos
Malformação de Arnold-Chiari/epidemiologia , Malformação de Arnold-Chiari/cirurgia , Otolaringologia/métodos , Padrões de Prática Médica , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Malformação de Arnold-Chiari/patologia , Criança , Paralisia Facial/epidemiologia , Feminino , Cefaleia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva , Vertigem/epidemiologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Preoperative evaluation was made of the diagnostic value of endoanal ultrasound (EAUS) and endovaginal magnetic resonance imaging (EVMRI) in diagnosing anal sphincter defects as the cause of anal incontinence. Nineteen female individuals with anal incontinence were examined clinically with EAUS and with EVMRI at 1.5 T using a prostatic coil. The findings were evaluated independently and compared with findings at surgery. In diagnosing external anal sphincter defects, EAUS and EVMRI showed almost similar agreement with surgical findings, 12 (63%) out of 19 vs 11 (58%), respectively. Internal anal sphincter defects were equally detected by EAUS and EVMRI as compared with surgical diagnosis. There was considerable variation between radiologists in diagnosing defects by EVMRI. EAUS and EVMRI are equal in diagnosing anal sphincter defects.