NEURORADIOLOGY / ORIGINAL PAPER
Detection of cholesteatoma recurrence by magnetic resonance imaging (DWI non-EPI sequence) – how can we minimise false results?
1
Department of Otolaryngology and Laryngological Oncology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland
2
Doctoral School, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland
3
Department of General Radiology and Neuroradiology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland
Submission date: 2025-01-29
Final revision date: 2025-04-03
Acceptance date: 2025-04-13
Publication date: 2025-06-25
Corresponding author
Marta Pietraszek
Department of Otolaryngology and Laryngological Oncology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 49 Przybyszewskiego St., 60-355 Poznan, Poland
Department of Otolaryngology and Laryngological Oncology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, 49 Przybyszewskiego St., 60-355 Poznan, Poland
Pol J Radiol, 2025; 90: 318-323
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
To evaluate the effectiveness of head magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the diffusion weighted imaging without echo-planar imaging (DWI non-EPI) sequence in detecting cholesteatoma recurrence, focusing on the analysis of false results.
Material and methods:
A retrospective study was conducted involving 156 patients diagnosed with cholesteatoma, who underwent reoperation between 2015 and 2021. All patients underwent preoperative MRI with the DWI non-EPI sequence. Data from surgical protocols, medical histories, outpatient records, and imaging results were analysed. MRI scans were reviewed by experienced radiologists and otosurgeons. The study was approved by the local Bioethics Committee.
Results:
Clinical and radiological concordance was found in 80% of patients. True positive results were observed in 77.5% of cases, while true negative results were noted in 2.5%. False positive results occurred in 8% of cases, mainly due to wax in the external auditory canal. False negative results were found in 12% of cases, often due to small or mural cholesteatomas. The sensitivity of MRI DWI non-EPI in detecting cholesteatoma was 87%.
Conclusions:
MRI DWI non-EPI is an effective tool for detecting cholesteatoma recurrence, potentially avoiding unnecessary second-look surgeries. Awareness of false positive and negative results is crucial, and correlation of MRI findings with clinical examinations is recommended. To minimise false results, ear cleaning before MRI and repeated examinations at intervals are advised.
To evaluate the effectiveness of head magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the diffusion weighted imaging without echo-planar imaging (DWI non-EPI) sequence in detecting cholesteatoma recurrence, focusing on the analysis of false results.
Material and methods:
A retrospective study was conducted involving 156 patients diagnosed with cholesteatoma, who underwent reoperation between 2015 and 2021. All patients underwent preoperative MRI with the DWI non-EPI sequence. Data from surgical protocols, medical histories, outpatient records, and imaging results were analysed. MRI scans were reviewed by experienced radiologists and otosurgeons. The study was approved by the local Bioethics Committee.
Results:
Clinical and radiological concordance was found in 80% of patients. True positive results were observed in 77.5% of cases, while true negative results were noted in 2.5%. False positive results occurred in 8% of cases, mainly due to wax in the external auditory canal. False negative results were found in 12% of cases, often due to small or mural cholesteatomas. The sensitivity of MRI DWI non-EPI in detecting cholesteatoma was 87%.
Conclusions:
MRI DWI non-EPI is an effective tool for detecting cholesteatoma recurrence, potentially avoiding unnecessary second-look surgeries. Awareness of false positive and negative results is crucial, and correlation of MRI findings with clinical examinations is recommended. To minimise false results, ear cleaning before MRI and repeated examinations at intervals are advised.
REFERENCES (27)
1.
Pérez-Herrera LC, Peñaranda D, Moreno-López S, Otoya-Tono AM, Gutiérrez-Velasco L, García JM, et al. Associated factors, health-related quality of life, and reported costs of chronic otitis media in adults at two otologic referral centers in a middle-income country. PLoS One 2020; 15: e0244797. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244797.
2.
Wiatr M, Składzień J, Stręk P, Przeklasa-Muszyńska A, Wiatr A. Chronic otitis media with granulation is a poor prognostic factor for hearing improvement and development of intracranial complications. J Int Adv Otol 2019; 15: 12-17.
3.
Brennan-Jones CG, Head K, Chong LY, Burton MJ, Schilder AGM, Bhutta MF; Cochrane ENT Group. Topical antibiotics for chronic suppurative otitis media. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 2020: CD013051. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013051.pub2.
4.
Jung J, Jung SY, Kim MG, Kim YI, Kim SH, Yeo SG. Comparison of autophagy mRNA expression between chronic otitis media with and without cholesteatoma. J Audiol Otol 2020; 24: 191-197.
6.
World Health Organization. Chronic Suppurative Otitis Media (CSOM): Burden of Illness and Management Options. Geneva: WHO; 2004.
7.
Ayaz Z, Taj B, Yaseen MS, Ishaq U, Laique T, Malik J, et al. Causality of chronic suppurative otitis media: an observational study. Cureus 2020; 12: e9832. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.9832.
8.
Phillips JS, Haggard M, Yung M. A new health-related quality of life measure for active chronic otitis media (COMQ-12): development and initial validation. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35: 454-458.
9.
Castle JT. Cholesteatoma pearls: practical points and update. Head Neck Pathol 2018; 12: 419-429.
10.
van der Toom HFE, van der Schroeff MP, Metselaar M, van Linge A, Vroegop JL, Pauw RJ. Treatment outcome of the bony obliteration tympanoplasty versus nonobliterative techniques in cholesteatoma surgery. A retrospective analysis. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42: 1366-1374.
11.
Karamert R, Eravci FC, Cebeci S, Duzlu M, Zorlu ME, Gulhan N, et al. Canal wall down versus canal wall up surgeries in the treatment of middle ear cholesteatoma. Turk J Med Sci 2019; 49: 1426-1432.
12.
Choi DL, Gupta MK, Rebello R, Archibald JD. Cost-comparison analysis of diffusion weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWMRI) versus second look surgery for the detection of residual and recurrent cholesteatoma. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2019; 48: 58. DOI: 10.1186/s40463-019-0384-1.
13.
Mizutari K, Takihata S, Kimura E, Inuzuka E, Shiotani A. Patency of anterior epitympanic space and surgical outcomes after endoscopic ear surgery for the attic cholesteatoma. Otol Neurotol 2021; 42: 266-273.
14.
Muhonen EG, Mahboubi H, Moshtaghi O, Sahyouni R, Ghavami Y, Maducdoc M, et al. False-positive cholesteatomas on non-echoplanar diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Otol Neurotol 2020; 41: e588-e592. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002606.
15.
Vercruysse JP, De Foer B, Pouillon M, Somers T, Casselman J, Offeciers E. The value of diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the diagnosis of primary acquired and residual cholesteatoma: a surgical verified study of 100 patients. Eur Radiol 2006; 16: 1461-1467.
16.
Balik AO, Seneldir L, Verim A, Toros SZ. The role of fusion technique of computed tomography and non-echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of surgical cholesteatoma localization. Medeni Med J 2022; 37: 13-20.
17.
Dremmen MHG, Hofman PAM, Hof JR, Stokroos RJ, Postma AA. The diagnostic accuracy of non-echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging in the detection of residual and/or recurrent cholesteatoma of the temporal bone. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33: 439-444.
18.
Touska P, Connor SEJ. ESR Essentials: imaging of middle ear cholesteatoma – practice recommendations by the European Society of Head and Neck Radiology. Eur Radiol 2025; 35: 2053-2064.
19.
Barbara M, Covelli E, Monini S, Bandiera G, Filippi C, Margani V, et al. Early non-EPI DW-MRI after cholesteatoma surgery. Ear Nose Throat J 2024; 103: 435-441.
20.
Fong JB, McCool RR. Titanium implant obscuring residual cholesteatoma on magnetic resonance imaging: a case report. Ear Nose Throat J 2024; 8: 1455613241241112. DOI: 10.1177/01455613241241112.
21.
Amoodi H, Mofti A, Fatani NH, Alhatem H, Zabidi A, Ibrahim M. Non-echo planar diffusion-weighted imaging in the detection of recurrent or residual cholesteatoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies. Cureus 2022; 14: e32127. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32127.
22.
Jindal M, Riskalla A, Jiang D, Connor S, O’Connor AF. A systematic review of diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of postoperative cholesteatoma. Otol Neurotol 2011; 32: 1243-1249.
23.
Piekarek A, Zatoński T, Kolator M, Bladowska J, Sąsiadek M, Zimny A. The value of different diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance techniques in the diagnosis of middle ear cholesteatoma. Is there still an indication for echo-planar diffusion-weighted imaging? Pol J Radiol 2022; 87: e51-e57. DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2022.113194.
24.
Benson JC, Carlson ML, Lane JI. Non-EPI versus multishot EPI DWI in cholesteatoma detection: correlation with operative findings. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2021; 42: 573-577.
25.
Eggink MC, de Wolf MJF, Ebbens FA, de Win MML, Dikkers FG, van Spronsen E. MRI-DWI detection of residual cholesteatoma: moving toward an optimum follow-up scheme. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2024; 282: 659-668.
26.
Horn RJ, Gratama JWC, van der Zaag-Loonen HJ, Droogh-de Greve KE, van Benthem PPG. Negative predictive value of non-echo-planar diffusion weighted MR imaging for the detection of residual cholesteatoma done at 9 months after primary surgery is not high enough to omit second look surgery. Otol Neurotol 2019; 40: 911-919.
27.
Geoffray A, Guesmi M, Nebbia JF, Leloutre B, Bailleux S, Maschi C. MRI for the diagnosis of recurrent middle ear cholesteatoma in children – can we optimize the technique? Preliminary study. Pediatr Radiol 2013; 43: 464-473.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
