J Korean Cleft Palate-Craniofac Assoc.  2002 Apr;3(1):55-59.

Comparison of Computerized Tomography(CT) and Ultrasonography(US) in the Diagnosis of Nasal Bone Fracture and Medial Orbital Wall Fracture

  • 1Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Wonkwang University, Iksan, Korea. ycnadr@hanmail.net


For the diagnosis of nasal bone fracture and medial orbital wall fracture, plain radiography and computerized tomography(CT) have been utilized. But plain radiography is less reliable due to its low specificity. So CT has been given a preference to plain radiography in examining both fractures. However, CT has some disadventages; high expense, heavy radiation hazard, and coexistent injuries may restricted a patient,s positioning and so thus preventing or delaying the diagnosis. By comparison, ultrasonography(US) represents a safe, inexpensive, noninvasive, portable, and wide availability. This paper compares the relative values of CT and US in the diagnosis of both fractures. In nasal bone fracture, US proved to be more accurate than CT. Thirty-seven nasal bone fractures were diagnosed by US; whereas only thirty-two of these were revealed on CT. Compared with US, CT demonstrated 87% sensitivity. In examining medial orbital wall fracture, eight cases were diagnosed by CT; whereas seven of these were revealed on US. Compared with CT, US demonstrated 88% sensitivity. In medial orbital wall fracture, US was almost as accurate as CT. In this research, it is concluded that in the investigation of nasal bone fracture and medial orbital wall fracture, US is an accurate diagnostic modality and correlates well with CT.


Computerized tomography(CT); Ultrasonography (US); Nasal bone fracture; Medial orbital wall fracture

MeSH Terms

Nasal Bone*
Sensitivity and Specificity
Full Text Links
export Copy
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2023 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr