Don't want to get the temporal bone CT scan. Is it possible to image this condition with a ultrasound or rule it out through other means?
High Pitch Ultrasound for Detecting Superior Canal Dehiscence?
- Thread starter buzzythedude
- Start date
MemberI don't know of any other way, since you have to image bone structure.
Why don't you want to do the CT Scan? It seems like the right tool for the job.
A CT scan is not a guarantee of getting cancer. I have had four CT scans in my life. Head scans tend to use less radiation than other scans. In fact, you can look up radiation data and compare the amount in a specific CT scan versus flying on a plane, eating a banana, a dental X-ray, etc.
I particularly like this infographic.
So a head CT is 2 mSv and the yearly dose for natural potassium in our body is 390 microSv, so we already get the same dose as a head CT every 5 years from... doing nothing!
Also, watch out for that 0.1 microSv from that banana!
Jokes aside, of course ionizing radiation is a risk, but it's the unfortunate price to pay for diagnosis. My CT scan was crucial in zeroing in on my ear condition. Without it, there's a good chance that my treatment and surgery would have been delayed, and that more damage would have resulted to my hearing apparatus.
Good luck!
No offense but I posted this not to argue about the dangers of CT scans and trust me you are totally misrepresenting the dangers of it. 5 years all at once..Since posting this I found an article on MRI having a 100% negative predictive value for canal dehiscence (in other words not being able to specify but able to rule out) and there is a lot going on with ultrasound of the ear I just was hoping someone had specificly used it for this purpose and could tell the tale.
Well tell me more!
That's a pretty good alternative then (although I'm always leery of absolute claims like "100%" - when one knows how interpretations from the same imaging data can vary among doctors). Certainly if you have a choice between CT and MRI and you don't have metal to heat up and fly around your head (I now do, unfortunately), then MRI is probably the safer choice.
There's a member here who thinks she may have gotten her T after an ear ultrasound. You may find that thread interesting.
You can get or worsen tinnitus via an MRI, so the MRI is not particularly safe for us as a subgroup of patients.
The MRI they put me into was as loud as a sawmill. You don't want to subject your ears to that for 20-40 minutes unless there is absolutely no alternative, believe me.
The MRI they put me into was as loud as a sawmill. You don't want to subject your ears to that for 20-40 minutes unless there is absolutely no alternative, believe me.
Last edited:
Log in or register to get the full forum benefits!
Similar threads
