Effects of paranasal sinus ostia and volume on acoustic rhinometry measurements: a model study

2003 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 1527-1535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozcan Cakmak ◽  
Huseyin Çelik ◽  
Mehmet Cankurtaran ◽  
Fuat Buyuklu ◽  
Nuri Özgirgin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Paranasal Sinus ◽  
Posterior Part ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Side Branch ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Distance Curve ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Acoustic Resonances ◽  
Sinus Ostium

We used pipe models to investigate the effects of paranasal sinus ostium size and paranasal sinus volume on the area-distance curves derived by acoustic rhinometry (AR). Each model had a Helmholtz resonator or a short neck as a side branch that simulated the paranasal sinus and sinus ostium. The AR-derived cross-sectional areas posterior to the ostium were significantly overestimated. Sinus volume affected the AR measurements only when the sinus was connected via a relatively large ostium. The experimental area-distance curve posterior to the side branch showed pronounced oscillations in association with low-frequency acoustic resonances in this distal part of the pipe. The experimental results are discussed in terms of theoretically calculated “sound-power reflection coefficients” for the pipe models used. The results indicate that the effects of paranasal sinuses and low-frequency acoustic resonances in the posterior part of the nasal cavity are not accounted for in the current AR algorithms. AR does not provide reliable information about sinus ostium size, sinus volume, or cross-sectional area in the distal parts of nasal cavity.

Acoustic rhinometry in humans: accuracy of nasal passage area estimates, and ability to quantify paranasal sinus volume and ostium size

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 616-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erkan Tarhan ◽  
Mehmet Coskun ◽  
Ozcan Cakmak ◽  
Hüseyin Çelik ◽  
Mehmet Cankurtaran
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Paranasal Sinus ◽  
Helmholtz Resonator ◽  
Side Branch ◽  
Cross Sectional Area ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Nasal Passage ◽  
Sectional Area ◽  
Distance Curve ◽  
Cross Sectional

A comprehensive study that compared acoustic rhinometry (AR) data to computed tomography (CT) data was performed to evaluate the accuracy of AR measurements in estimating nasal passage area and to assess its ability of quantifying paranasal sinus volume and ostium size in live humans. Twenty nasal passages of 10 healthy adults were examined by using AR and CT. Actual cross-sectional areas of the nasal cavity, sinus ostia sizes, and maxillary and frontal sinus volumes were determined from CT sections perpendicular to the curved acoustic axis of the nasal passage. Nasal cavity volume (from nostril to choana) calculated from the AR-derived area-distance curve was compared with that from the CT-derived area-distance curve. AR measurements were also done on pipe models that featured a side branch (Helmholtz resonator of constant volume but two different neck diameters) simulating a paranasal sinus. In the anterior nasal cavity, there was good agreement between the cross-sectional areas determined by AR and CT. However, posterior to the sinus ostia, AR overestimated cross-sectional area. The difference between AR nasal volume and CT nasal volume was much smaller than the combined volume of the maxillary and frontal sinuses. The results suggest that AR measurements of the healthy adult nasal cavity are reasonably accurate to the level of the paranasal sinus ostia. Beyond this point, AR overestimates cross-sectional area and provides no quantitative data for sinus volume or ostium size. The effects of paranasal sinuses and acoustic resonances in the nasal cavity are not accounted for in the present AR algorithms.

Effects of Anatomical Variations of the Nasal Cavity on Acoustic Rhinometry Measurements: A Model Study

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozcan Cakmak ◽  
Huseyin Çelik ◽  
Mehmet Cankurtaran ◽  
Levent Naci Ozluoglu
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Paranasal Sinus ◽  
Paranasal Sinuses ◽  
Anatomical Variations ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Nasal Passage ◽  
Nasal Valve ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Cast Model ◽  
Sinus Ostium

Background The goal of this study was to assess how anatomic variations of the nasal cavity affect the accuracy of acoustic rhinometry (AR) measurements. Methods A cast model of a human nasal cavity was used to investigate the effects of the nasal valve and paranasal sinuses on AR measurements. A luminal impression of a cadaver nasal cavity was made, and a cast model was created from this impression. To simulate the nasal valve, inserts of varying inner diameter were placed in the model nasal passage. To simulate the paranasal sinuses, side branches with varying neck diameters and cavity volumes were attached to the model. Results The AR measurements of the anterior nasal passage were reasonably precise when the passage area of the insert was within the normal range. When the passage area of the insert was reduced, AR measurements significantly underestimated the cross-sectional areas beyond the insert. The volume of the paranasal sinus had limited effect on AR measurements when the sinus ostium was small. However, when the ostium size was large, increasing the volume of the sinus led to significant overestimation of AR-derived areas beyond the ostium. Conclusion The pathologies that narrow the anterior nasal passage result in the most significant AR error by causing area underestimation beyond the constriction. It also appears that increased paranasal sinus volume causes overestimation of areas posterior to the sinus ostium when the ostium size is large. If these physical effects are not considered, the results obtained during clinical examination with AR may be misinterpreted.

scholarly journals Effects of the nasal valve on acoustic rhinometry measurements: a model study

2003 ◽  
Vol 94 (6) ◽  
pp. 2166-2172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mehmet Cankurtaran ◽  
Hüseyin Çelik ◽  
Ozcan Cakmak ◽  
Levent Naci Özlüoglu
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Sound Power ◽  
Nasal Valve ◽  
Cylindrical Pipe ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Model Study ◽  
Valve Area

The influence of nasal valve on acoustic rhinometry (AR) measurements was evaluated by using simple nasal cavity models. Each model consisted of a cylindrical pipe with an insert simulating the nasal valve. The AR-determined cross-sectional areas beyond the insert were consistently underestimated, and the corresponding area-distance curves showed pronounced oscillations. The area underestimation was more pronounced in models with inserts of small passage area. The experimental results are discussed in terms of theoretically calculated “sound-power reflection coefficients” for the pipe models. The reason for area underestimation is reflection of most of the incident sound power from the barrier at the front junction between the pipe and the insert. It was also demonstrated that the oscillations are due to low-frequency acoustic resonances in the portion of the pipe beyond the insert. The results suggest that AR does not provide reliable information about the cross-sectional areas of the nasal cavity posterior to a significant constriction, such as pathologies narrowing the nasal valve area. When the passage area of the nasal valve is decreased, the role of AR as a diagnostic tool for the entire nasal cavity becomes limited.

Acoustic Rhinometry: Accuracy and Ability to Detect Changes in Passage Area at Different Locations in the Nasal Cavity

2005 ◽  
Vol 114 (12) ◽  
pp. 949-957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ozcan Cakmak ◽  
Erkan Tarhan ◽  
Mehmet Coskun ◽  
Mehmet Cankurtaran ◽  
Huseyin Çelik
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Middle Turbinate ◽  
Inferior Turbinate ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Nasal Passage ◽  
Nasal Valve ◽  
Distance Curve ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Computed Tomographic ◽  
Cast Model

Objectives: To evaluate the accuracy of acoustic rhinometry (AR) measurements, and to assess how well AR detects obstructions of various sizes at specific sites in the nasal cavity, we created a cast model from an adult cadaver nasal cavity. Methods: The actual cross-sectional areas of the cast model nasal passage were determined by computed tomography and compared with the corresponding areas measured by AR. To assess how nasal obstruction affects the AR results, we placed small wax spheres of different diameters at specific sites in the model (nasal valve, head of the inferior turbinate, head of the middle turbinate, middle of the middle turbinate, choana, and nasopharynx). Results: The AR-derived cross-sectional areas in the first 6.5 cm of the cast model nasal cavity were very close to the corresponding areas calculated from computed tomographic sections perpendicular to the presumed acoustic axis. However, AR overestimated the passage areas at locations posterior to the 6.5-cm point. Acoustic rhinometry gave an accurate indication of the passage area of the nasal valve and its distance from the nostril. The nasal valve and the choana were indicated by significant dips on the AR area-distance curve, whereas the curve was smooth throughout the region that included the head of the inferior turbinate, the head of the middle turbinate, the middle of the middle turbinate, and the nasopharynx. In other words, AR did not discretely identify these latter sites. Acoustic rhinometry detected the different-sized inserts (obstructions) more accurately at the nasal valve than at sites posterior to this location. Conclusions: The results of the study show that AR is a valuable method for assessing the anterior nasal cavity. This technique is sensitive for detecting changes in passage area at the nasal valve region; however, the sensitivity is lower at sites posterior to this. The findings suggest that when there is substantial narrowing of the nasal valve, AR will not identify an obstruction at any location posterior to the nasal valve. In such situations, AR measurements beyond the abnormal nasal valve may easily lead to misinterpretation of the patient's nasal anatomy or condition.

A Comparison of the Nasal Cross-Sectional Areas and Volumes Obtained with Acoustic Rhinometry and Magnetic Resonance Imaging

1997 ◽  
Vol 117 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacquelynne P. Corey ◽  
Anil Gungor ◽  
Robert Nelson ◽  
Jeff Fredberg ◽  
Vincent Lai
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Nasal Tip ◽  
Nasal Cycle ◽  
Volume Measurements ◽  
Mri Measurements

Acoustic rhinometry (AR) evaluates the geometry of the nasal cavity with acoustic reflections and provides information about nasal cross-sectional areas (CSA) and nasal volume within a given distance. The accuracy of the information obtained by AR was compared with that of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the nasal cavity. Five healthy subjects were evaluated with AR and the MRI before and after the application of a long-acting nasal decongestant spray, to eliminate possible interference of the nasal cycle with both measurement techniques. The MRI images of 2 mm coronal sections of the nasal cavity were traced by three independent observers and the CSAs were calculated by computer-aided imaging digitization, to be compared with the calculated CSAs obtained with the AR at the corresponding distance from the nasal tip. Digitized data from the MRI images were also used to calculate the nasal volume within the first 6 cm from the nasal tip and compared with the AR volume measurements. The interobserver variation of digitized MRI data predecongestant and postdecongestant was not significant. The correlations of CSA and volume measurements between the AR and MRI were high (0.969) after the application of the decongestant. The correlation between the AR and MRI measurements before the decongestant was low (0.345). This may have been the result of interference of the nasal cycle during the long MRI measurements (1 hour) or other unknown factors. We conclude that AR measurements of nasal CSAs and volumes provide accurate information when compared with the MRI of the decongested nasal airway.

Nasal airway geometry: comparison between acoustic reflections and magnetic resonance scanning

1993 ◽  
Vol 75 (6) ◽  
pp. 2811-2819 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Hilberg ◽  
F. T. Jensen ◽  
O. F. Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Posterior Part ◽  
Interindividual Variation ◽  
Acoustic Measurements ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Acoustic Reflection ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Scanning

To evaluate the accuracy of the acoustic reflection (AR) technique for determination of nasal cavity cross-sectional areas, the area-distance function of both sides of the nose was determined in 10 subjects and compared with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Interindividual variation for the correlation between MRI and AR was seen, but in general the areas from 1 to 6 cm into the nasal cavity measured by AR were larger than areas measured by MRI, especially where the surface was most convoluted. The total volume for this region was 6.47 +/- 1.83 (SD) cm3 for AR and 5.65 +/- 1.34 cm3 for MRI. It was demonstrated that this could be due to errors in calculation of the areas on the basis of MRI and AR. In the posterior part of the nasal cavity and the epipharynx, there was a convincingly higher correlation between acoustic measurements and a scan perpendicular to the assumed geometrical axis of the epipharynx than between acoustic measurements and coronal scanning. This indicates that the sound axis roughly follows the geometrical axis. In a model of two tubes (nasal cavities) joined in a larger tube (the epipharynx), closure of the posterior part of the latter revealed that the contralateral nasal cavity is likely to cause overestimation of the posterior part of the epipharynx during AR compared with MRI.

Effects of the Breathe Right Nasal Strips on Nasal Ventilation

1997 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 399-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Gosepath ◽  
Wolf J. Mann ◽  
Ronald G. Amedee
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Physical Performance ◽  
Cross Sectional Area ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Sectional Area ◽  
Nasal Breathing ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Subjective Impression ◽  
Breathe Right Nasal Strips ◽  
And Training

The Breathe Right nasal strips are more and more commonly used, mainly by athletes, who hope to enhance their physical performance in competition and training. The effect of the device in such situations is uncertain and perhaps somewhat controversial. To investigate the effects of the nasal strips on nasal ventilation, 20 Caucasian individuals were objectively assessed using anterior rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry. The results showed a significant increase in all subjects of transnasal airflow and in the average cross-sectional area of the nasal cavity that quantifies objectively the subjective impression of improved nasal breathing. In such patients where an improvement in nasal ventilation is desired, the use of the Breathe Right nasal strips seems to offer a beneficial treatment.

scholarly journals Effect of rapid maxillary expansion on the dimension of the nasal cavity and on facial morphology assessed by acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 129-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Enoki Itikawa ◽  
Fabiana Cardoso Pereira Valera ◽  
Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto ◽  
Wilma Terezinha Anselmo Lima
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Nasal Bone ◽  
Inferior Turbinate ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Mouth Breathing ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Facial Morphology ◽  
Nasal Resistance ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Cross Sectional

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of rapid maxillary expansion on facial morphology and on nasal cavity dimensions of mouth breathing children by acoustic rhinometry and computed rhinomanometry. METHODS: Cohort; 29 mouth breathing children with posterior crossbite were evaluated. Orthodontic and otorhinolaryngologic documentation were performed at three different times, i.e., before expansion, immediately after and 90 days following expansion. RESULTS: The expansion was accompanied by an increase of the maxillary and nasal bone transversal width. However, there were no significant differences in relation to mucosal area of the nose. Acoustic rhinometry showed no difference in the minimal cross-sectional area at the level of the valve and inferior turbinate between the periods analyzed, although rhinomanometry showed a statistically significant reduction in nasal resistance right after expansion, but were similar to pre-treatment values 90 days after expansion. CONCLUSION: The maxillary expansion increased the maxilla and nasal bony area, but was inefficient to increase the nasal mucosal area, and may lessen the nasal resistance, although there was no difference in nasal geometry. Significance: Nasal bony expansion is followed by a mucosal compensation.

Acoustic Rhinometry in the Diagnosis of Occupational Rhinitis

1996 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 393-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maija L Hytönen ◽  
Eeva L Sala ◽  
Henrik O Malmberg ◽  
Henrik Nordman
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Provocation Test ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Occupational Rhinitis ◽  
Limit Value ◽  
Provocation Tests ◽  
Calculated Parameter ◽  
Essential Change ◽  
The Mean

Acoustic rhinometry (ARM) has been used to study the nasal cavity geometry and the response in nasal provocations. However, the use of ARM in the diagnosis of occupational rhinitis (OR) has not been reported. The purpose of this study was to find an ARM parameter and a limit value that could be used in provocation tests to express an objective change in the nasal cavity geometry. We used a new calculated parameter, Volume MCA%, for describing the change in the nasal geometry. Volume MCA% is the mean of the percentile changes of nasal volumes and minimal cross-sectional areas in a provocation test. We recommend a decrease of at least 15% in Volume MCA% for the limit of an essential change in the nasal cavity.

Acoustic rhinometry: influence of paranasal sinuses

1996 ◽  
Vol 80 (5) ◽  
pp. 1589-1594 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Hilberg ◽  
O. F. Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
Nasal Cavity ◽  
Posterior Part ◽  
Acoustic Rhinometry ◽  
Nasal Cavities ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Measured Volume ◽  
Maxillary Sinuses ◽  
Made In

The influence of the maxillary sinuses in acoustic rhinometry (AR) has not been evaluated, and this is the aim of the present study. We examined six subjects with AR and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after nasal decongestion to compare the area-distance relationships determined by the two methods. From the MRI data we obtained copies of the nasal cavities with and without maxillary sinuses, which were made in plastic by a stereolithographic method. AR curves from models without maxillary sinuses differed from AR curves with sinuses included but were in agreement with MRI curves without inclusion of sinuses. A similar difference in AR was seen in two subjects before and after the nasal cavities were flushed with saline to fill up the maxillary sinuses. The measured volume in the first 50 mm of the nasal cavity models was unaffected by the sinuses, but the volume in the first 70 mm corresponding to the length of the nasal cavity septum was increased slightly but significantly (from 10.8 to 11.3 cm3; P = 0.05). The presence of maxillary sinuses increased the volume of the epipharynx (70-100 mm from the nostril) from 12.2 to 21.3 cm3 (P < 0.01), and this increase was not due to the influence from the contralateral nasal cavity. We conclude that the maxillary sinuses may significantly contribute to the acoustically determined areas in the posterior part of the nasal cavity and the epipharynx, especially during decongestion, and may explain a part of the difference between area-distance curves obtained by AR and MRI, whereas contribution from the contralateral nasal cavity does not.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document