Interrater reliability of sonographic examinations of orbital fractures.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to determine whether there are statistically significant variations among different observers when examining fractures of the orbital walls. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From December 2003 to April 2004, 28 patients with clinically suspected orbital fractures were examined by ultrasound prospectively. The US images of the infra-orbital margins, the orbital floors, the medial and lateral orbital walls of each patient were reexamined by two independent investigators. RESULTS: Computed tomography revealed fractures of the orbital floor in 28 out of 31 patients (90.3%). The infra-orbital margins showed fractures of 14 of 31 patients (45.2%). The ultrasound examinations of the orbits by the three examiners presented satisfactory correlation regarding sensitivity and specificity. There were no significant differences between investigators. There was good agreement among the ultrasound examiners regarding the infra-orbital margins. This was not the case for the orbital floors. CONCLUSIONS: If there are clear cut clinical findings ultrasound examination could represent an alternative to computed tomography. If the clinical findings were indeterminate, computed tomography was essential as implicated by this study. Accordingly, further evaluation of ultrasound examinations of fractures of the orbital margins and floors are necessary.

Clinical signs of orbital wall fractures as a function of anatomic location.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to see whether clinical signs of medial orbital wall fractures distinguished these fractures from fractures of the lateral orbital wall and the orbital floor. STUDY DESIGN: The orbital fractures of 424 patients were analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: (1) patients with orbital fractures with a medial orbital wall component and (2) patients with orbital fractures without a medial orbital wall component. RESULTS: Orbital fractures with involvement of the medial orbital wall showed a significantly higher incidence (P =.001) of diplopia and exophthalmos (P =.039) than fractures without involvement of the medial wall. CONCLUSION: Posttraumatic orbital clinical signs are associated with a higher incidence of medial orbital wall component fracture. Apparent lack of involvement of the medial orbital wall should not be an exclusion criterion for a surgical intervention when clinical orbital signs exist.

Intrarater reliability in the ultrasound diagnosis of medial and lateral orbital wall fractures with a curved array transducer.

PURPOSE: The aims of the study were to document the effectiveness of ultrasound (US) in diagnosing orbital wall fractures when compared with computed tomography (CT) and to measure the intraobserver reliability of US using a curved array transducer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2003 to March 2004, 13 patients with the clinical diagnosis of an orbital trauma were investigated prospectively by CT (reference) and 2 US investigators. Both orbits were investigated. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive value were calculated. The statistical difference between the 2 US investigators was calculated by a chi-square test. The interrater reliability was calculated using the lambda coefficient. Values below 0.4 represent poor reliability, between 0.4 and 0.75 represent fair to good reliability, and a score > 0.75 is graded as excellent reliability. RESULTS: The comparison of the results of the 2 US investigators by the chi-square test showed P values of .385 for the medial orbital wall and .638 for the lateral orbital wall, which shows no significant difference. The lambda-value for the investigation of the medial orbital wall reached 0.429, 0.714, and 0.750. The lambda-value for the investigation of the lateral orbital wall yielded 0.647, 0.750, and 0.882. These values show a good and excellent inter-rater reliability. CONCLUSION: The US investigation does not yet reach the diagnostic quality of CT. US could be a helpful diagnostic imaging tool in cases with clear clinical symptoms. The results of the current study and the previously published results imply that US has the potential to reach the same diagnostic quality as CT in the future, but further studies must be performed to improve the diagnostic quality of the method.

Ultrasound versus computed tomography in the imaging of orbital floor fractures.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether orbital ultrasonography (US) with a curved-array transducer could be an alternative imaging method to computed tomography (CT) to detect orbital wall fractures and fractures of the infraorbital rim. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with the clinical ophthalmologic or radiologic diagnosis of an orbital trauma were investigated prospectively by US and CT. The reference method was the intraoperative findings. RESULTS: CT evaluation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 79%, a specificity of 90%, and an accuracy of 94%. The positive predictive value (PPV) and the negative predictive value (NPV) of the infraorbital rim reached 69% and 83%, respectively. CT evaluation of the orbital floor showed a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 71%, and an accuracy of 96%. PPV and NPV resulted in 71% and 93%, respectively. US investigation of the infraorbital rim yielded a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 89%, and an accuracy of 97%, whereas PPV and NPV reached 65% and 83%, respectively. US investigation of the orbital floor reached a sensitivity of 94%, a specificity of 57%, and an accuracy of 96%, whereas PPV and NPV yielded 57% and 91%, respectively. No significant difference was found between US and CT in the investigation of the infraorbital rim (P =.809) and the orbital floor (P =.729). CONCLUSIONS: US with a curved-array transducer appears to be a useful alternative method in the investigation of orbital floor fractures. Further studies have to be conducted to reduce the presence of false-negative results.

Effectiveness of ultrasonography in determining medial and lateral orbital wall fractures with a curved-array scanner.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of ultrasonography to determine medial and lateral orbital wall fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with the clinical diagnosis of an orbital trauma underwent coronal computed tomography (CCT) and ultrasonographic investigation (US). Inclusion criteria were clinically suspected orbital injuries defined by reduced bulbus motility, diplopia, or additional traumatic injuries of the orbit or the globe. US and CCT were used as imaging diagnostic methods. RESULTS: Ultrasonography showed a sensitivity of 56%, a specificity of 95%, and an accuracy of 88% at the medial orbital rim. Regarding the lateral orbital rim, ultrasonography showed a sensitivity of 92%, a specificity of 88%, and an accuracy of 90% using CCT as a reference method. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography with a curved-array scanner seems to be a valuable method in the detection of lateral orbital wall fractures. Further studies have to be done to improve sensitivity in the interpretation of medial orbital wall fractures.