Title: Correlation of Endoscopic and CT scan Findings in Laryngeal Carcinoma
Authors: Sushil Kumar Kashyap, Siva Selvaraj, Jagdish Prasad Purohit
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i5.02
Abstract
Background: Laryngeal carcinoma is a common cancer in Indian population. Early diagnosis and management of the disease can decrease the mortality rate of the disease. Endoscopy and computed tomography of larynx play vital roles in diagnosis of laryngeal carcinoma.
Methods and Materials: In a prospective study conducted in Department of ENT and Head & Neck Surgery, M.L.B. Medical College, Jhansi, U.P. we correlated the endoscopic and CT findings of larynx of 24 cases of laryngeal carcinoma.
Aims: To compare the endoscopic and CT larynx findings and correlation of them in diagnosing and staging of laryngeal carcinoma.
Summary: Laryngoscopy is better in detecting early mucosal changes of laryngeal cancer of various subsites as compare to CT scan. The few sites like ventricle, paraglottic space, pre epiglottic space can’t be assessed by laryngoscopy but can be better assessed by CT scan as well as the extention of disease to cartilage and neck. Both help in staging of laryngeal carcinoma. The Findings of endoscopy and CT scan and clinical staging can be confirmed by pathological staging of the disease.
Conclusion: Laryngeal endoscopy and CT have their own advantages and disadvantages in diagnosing and staging of laryngeal cancer can be done more precisely when both endoscopic and CT findings are correlated.
Keywords: Laryngeal endoscopy, Computed tomography, Laryngeal cancer, TNM Staging.
References
1. Silberman HD, Wilf H, Tucker JA. Flexible fiberoptic nasopharyngo-laryngoscope. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryn-gol. 1976 Sep-Oct;85(5 PT1):640–645
2. Steinberg H: Johann Nepomuk Czermak as a neurophysiologist in Leipzig. Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr. 2000 Aug; 68(8):339-43.
3. Koltai PJ: The story of the laryngoscope, Ear Nose Throat J. 1989Jul;68(7):494-502.
4. Kluyskens P et al Microlaryngoscopy: the Kleinsasser method: Acta Otorhinola-ryngol Belg. 1970; 24(6):687-92.
5. Daryush D. Mehta et al Current role of stroboscopy in laryngeal imaging: Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012 Dec; 20(6): 429–436.
6. Mancuso A et al: A comparative evalua-tion of CT and laryngography: Radiology 133, 131-138
7. Charlin B Brazeau et al Assessment of laryngeal cancer: CT scan versus Endoscopy, J.Otolaryngology 18, 283-288
8. P. Zbaren, M. Becker et al Staging of laryngeal cancer: Endoscopy, computed tomography and magnetic resonance versus histopathology, European archives of otorhinolaryngology January 1997, Vol 254, Supplement 1, pg S117-122
9. Cassleman J.W. et al. Imaging of laryngeal cancer. Acta. Otorhinolaryngology belq. 46, 161-174
10. Friedman W.H. Archer et al Computed tomography versus laryngoscopy; Compa-rison of relative diagn ostic value. Otolar-yngology. Head neck surg. 89, 579-589
11. Lloyd G.A. et al. The demonstration of cartilaginous involvement in laryngeal cancers by computed tomography. Clin. Otolayngol. 6, 171-176.
12. Alfred L. Weber. History of Head and Neck Radiology: Past, Present and Future; RSNA Radiology; January 2001: Vol 218, Issue 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.114-8/radiology.218.1.r01ja2715.
13. Alexander RE, Gunderman RB. EMI and the first CT scanner; Journal of American College of Radiology; 2010 Oct; 7 (10): 778-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2010.06.003.
S Bobdey et al. Epidemiological review of laryngeal cancer: An Indian perspective. Indian Journal of Med Pediatr Oncol. 2015 Jul-Sep; 36(3); 154-160. doi: 10.4103/0-971-5851.166721.