IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0310045.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The diagnostic performance of cochlear endolymphatic hydrops and perilymphatic enhancement in stratifying Ménière’s disease probabilities: A meta-analysis of semi-quantitative MRI-based grading systems

Author

Listed:
  • Neda Azarpey
  • Shahrzad-Sadat Seyed-Bagher-Nazeri
  • Omid Yazdani
  • Romina Esbati
  • Paria Boustani
  • Mobasher Hajiabbasi
  • Pouya Torabi
  • Dorreh Farazandeh
  • Hana Farzaneh
  • Ashkan Azizi
  • Behnam Amini
  • Moein Ghasemi
  • Zohre Ghasemi

Abstract

Background: The diagnosis of Meniere’s Disease (MD) presents significant challenges due to its complex symptomatology and the absence of definitive biomarkers. Advancements in MRI technology have spotlighted endolymphatic hydrops (EH) as a key pathological marker, necessitating a reevaluation of its diagnostic utility amidst the need for standardized and validated MRI-based grading scales. Methods: Our meta-analysis scrutinized the diagnostic efficacy of semi-quantitative MRI-based cochlear endolymphatic hydrops (EH) and perilymphatic enhancement (PLE) grading systems in delineating clinically relevant discriminations: “Spotting” the shift from normal or asymptomatic ears to possible/probable MD (pMD), “Confirming” the progression to definite MD (dMD), and “Establishing” the presence of dMD. A thorough literature search up to October 2023 resulted in 35 pertinent studies, forming the basis of our analysis through a bivariate mixed-effects regression model. Results: Using criteria from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) and Barany Society, across varying thresholds and disease probabilities; the Establishment model at an EH grade 1 threshold revealed a sensitivity of 85.4% and a specificity of 82.7%. Adjusting the threshold to EH grade 2 results in a sensitivity increase to 92.1% (CI: 85.9–95.7) and a specificity decrease to 70.6% (CI: 64.5–76.1), with a DOR of 28.056 (CI: 14.917–52.770). The Confirmation model yields a DOR of 5.216, indicating a lower diagnostic accuracy. The Spotting model demonstrates a sensitivity of 48.3% (CI: 34.8–62.1) and a specificity of 88.0% (CI: 77.8–93.9), with a DOR of 6.882. The normal ears subgroup demonstrated a notably high specificity of 89.7%, while employing Nakashima’s criteria resulted in a reduced sensitivity of 74.9%, significantly diverging from other systems (p-value

Suggested Citation

  • Neda Azarpey & Shahrzad-Sadat Seyed-Bagher-Nazeri & Omid Yazdani & Romina Esbati & Paria Boustani & Mobasher Hajiabbasi & Pouya Torabi & Dorreh Farazandeh & Hana Farzaneh & Ashkan Azizi & Behnam Amini, 2024. "The diagnostic performance of cochlear endolymphatic hydrops and perilymphatic enhancement in stratifying Ménière’s disease probabilities: A meta-analysis of semi-quantitative MRI-based grading system," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0310045
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0310045
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0310045&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0310045?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0310045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.