Abstract
Objectives
To evaluate the performance of 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) in assessing upper airway obstruction (UAO) in patients with Robin sequence (RS) and compare the accuracy and reliability of 4D-CT and flexible fiber-optic laryngoscopy (FFL).
Study Design
Prospective survey of retrospective clinical data.
Setting
Single, tertiary care pediatric hospital.
Methods
At initial and 30-day time points, a multidisciplinary group of 11 clinicians who treat RS rated UAO severity in 32 sets of 4D-CT visualizations and FFL videos (dynamic modalities) and static CT images. Raters assessed UAO at the velopharynx and oropharynx (1 = none to 5 = complete) and noted confidence levels of each rating. Intraclass correlation and Krippendorff alpha were used to assess intra- and interrater reliability, respectively. Accuracy was assessed by comparing clinician ratings with quantitative percentage constriction (QPC) ratings, calculated based on 4D-CT airway cross-sectional area. Results were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum and signed-rank tests.
Results
There was similar intrarater agreement (moderate to substantial) with 4D-CT and FFL, and both demonstrated fair interrater agreement. Both modalities underestimated UAO severity, although 4D-CT ratings were significantly more accurate, as determined by QPC similarity, than FFL (−1.06 and −1.46 vs QPC ratings, P = .004). Overall confidence levels were similar for 4D-CT and FFL, but other specialists were significantly less confident in FFL ratings than were otolaryngologists (2.25 and 3.92, P < .0001).
Conclusion
Although 4D-CT may be more accurate in assessing the degree of UAO in patients with RS, 4D-CT and FFL assessments demonstrate similar reliability. Additionally, 4D-CT may be interpreted with greater confidence by nonotolaryngologists who care for these patients.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
