Evaluation of the effectiveness of airway fluoroscopy in diagnosing patients with laryngomalacia

Colin Huntley, Michele Carr

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis: To re-evaluate the usefulness of airway fluoroscopy (AF) in diagnosing laryngomalacia and to determine the effectiveness of AF in diagnosing laryngomalacia depending on the specific lesion. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Patients from 0 to 12 months of age who presented with stridor were evaluated. Those who underwent AF and flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FFL) and/or direct laryngoscopy (DL) were included in the study. The diagnosis made through AF, FFL, and/ or DL were recorded with those considered definitive made through FFL and/or DL. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF compared to FFL and DL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF with regard to specific sites of laryngeal collapse were calculated. Results: AF showed an inconsistent sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value compared to FFL and DL with regard to specific lesions. AF had an overall sensitivity of 35%, specificity of 67%, positive predictive value of 78%, and negative predictive value of 23% when compared to FFL in diagnosing laryngomalacia. When compared to DL, AF had an overall sensitivity of 44%, specificity of 60%, positive predictive value of 67%, and negative predictive value of 38% when diagnosing laryngomalacia. Conclusions: AF is a commonly used modality in the diagnostic workup of a patient with stridor. The effectiveness of AF is limited when compared to endoscopy when used for the evaluation of laryngomalacia.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1430-1434
Number of pages5
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume120
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2010

Fingerprint

Laryngomalacia
Laryngoscopy
Fluoroscopy
Sensitivity and Specificity
Respiratory Sounds

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Huntley, Colin ; Carr, Michele. / Evaluation of the effectiveness of airway fluoroscopy in diagnosing patients with laryngomalacia. In: Laryngoscope. 2010 ; Vol. 120, No. 7. pp. 1430-1434.
@article{f8f8c7075a6b455cbb55599a4a6110d4,
title = "Evaluation of the effectiveness of airway fluoroscopy in diagnosing patients with laryngomalacia",
abstract = "Objectives/Hypothesis: To re-evaluate the usefulness of airway fluoroscopy (AF) in diagnosing laryngomalacia and to determine the effectiveness of AF in diagnosing laryngomalacia depending on the specific lesion. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Patients from 0 to 12 months of age who presented with stridor were evaluated. Those who underwent AF and flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FFL) and/or direct laryngoscopy (DL) were included in the study. The diagnosis made through AF, FFL, and/ or DL were recorded with those considered definitive made through FFL and/or DL. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF compared to FFL and DL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF with regard to specific sites of laryngeal collapse were calculated. Results: AF showed an inconsistent sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value compared to FFL and DL with regard to specific lesions. AF had an overall sensitivity of 35{\%}, specificity of 67{\%}, positive predictive value of 78{\%}, and negative predictive value of 23{\%} when compared to FFL in diagnosing laryngomalacia. When compared to DL, AF had an overall sensitivity of 44{\%}, specificity of 60{\%}, positive predictive value of 67{\%}, and negative predictive value of 38{\%} when diagnosing laryngomalacia. Conclusions: AF is a commonly used modality in the diagnostic workup of a patient with stridor. The effectiveness of AF is limited when compared to endoscopy when used for the evaluation of laryngomalacia.",
author = "Colin Huntley and Michele Carr",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/lary.20909",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "120",
pages = "1430--1434",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "7",

}

Evaluation of the effectiveness of airway fluoroscopy in diagnosing patients with laryngomalacia. / Huntley, Colin; Carr, Michele.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 120, No. 7, 01.07.2010, p. 1430-1434.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of the effectiveness of airway fluoroscopy in diagnosing patients with laryngomalacia

AU - Huntley, Colin

AU - Carr, Michele

PY - 2010/7/1

Y1 - 2010/7/1

N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis: To re-evaluate the usefulness of airway fluoroscopy (AF) in diagnosing laryngomalacia and to determine the effectiveness of AF in diagnosing laryngomalacia depending on the specific lesion. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Patients from 0 to 12 months of age who presented with stridor were evaluated. Those who underwent AF and flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FFL) and/or direct laryngoscopy (DL) were included in the study. The diagnosis made through AF, FFL, and/ or DL were recorded with those considered definitive made through FFL and/or DL. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF compared to FFL and DL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF with regard to specific sites of laryngeal collapse were calculated. Results: AF showed an inconsistent sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value compared to FFL and DL with regard to specific lesions. AF had an overall sensitivity of 35%, specificity of 67%, positive predictive value of 78%, and negative predictive value of 23% when compared to FFL in diagnosing laryngomalacia. When compared to DL, AF had an overall sensitivity of 44%, specificity of 60%, positive predictive value of 67%, and negative predictive value of 38% when diagnosing laryngomalacia. Conclusions: AF is a commonly used modality in the diagnostic workup of a patient with stridor. The effectiveness of AF is limited when compared to endoscopy when used for the evaluation of laryngomalacia.

AB - Objectives/Hypothesis: To re-evaluate the usefulness of airway fluoroscopy (AF) in diagnosing laryngomalacia and to determine the effectiveness of AF in diagnosing laryngomalacia depending on the specific lesion. Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Methods: Patients from 0 to 12 months of age who presented with stridor were evaluated. Those who underwent AF and flexible fiberoptic laryngoscopy (FFL) and/or direct laryngoscopy (DL) were included in the study. The diagnosis made through AF, FFL, and/ or DL were recorded with those considered definitive made through FFL and/or DL. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF compared to FFL and DL were calculated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of AF with regard to specific sites of laryngeal collapse were calculated. Results: AF showed an inconsistent sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value compared to FFL and DL with regard to specific lesions. AF had an overall sensitivity of 35%, specificity of 67%, positive predictive value of 78%, and negative predictive value of 23% when compared to FFL in diagnosing laryngomalacia. When compared to DL, AF had an overall sensitivity of 44%, specificity of 60%, positive predictive value of 67%, and negative predictive value of 38% when diagnosing laryngomalacia. Conclusions: AF is a commonly used modality in the diagnostic workup of a patient with stridor. The effectiveness of AF is limited when compared to endoscopy when used for the evaluation of laryngomalacia.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954410212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954410212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.20909

DO - 10.1002/lary.20909

M3 - Article

C2 - 20578105

AN - SCOPUS:77954410212

VL - 120

SP - 1430

EP - 1434

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 7

ER -