Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the structural
variations of nasal cavity in reference to frequency and types
at the key area i.e. the ostiomeatal
complex. Materials and Methods: Computed tomography of Paranasal sinuses of 50 patients was studied for clinical suspicion of various sinonasal pathologies. Results: The most commonly encountered
anatomical variations in this study were Deviated Nasal Septum in 78% (39
patients), followed by Concha Bullosa in 36% (18 patients), Agger Nasi cell in
18% (nine patients), Pneumatised septum in 12% (six patients), Paradoxical
Middle Turbinate and Septated Maxillary Sinus in 10% (five patients each) and
Pneumatised Uncinate Process 6% (three patients). In quite a few patients we
witnessed more than one variation. Conclusion: The anatomical variations in the nose and ostiomeatal complex are not
uncommon, with the most frequent ones involving thenasal septum and the middle
Cite this paper
J. Biswas, C. Patil, P. Deshmukh, R. Kharat and V. Nahata, "Tomographic Evaluation of Structural Variations of Nasal Cavity in Various Nasal Pathologies," International Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Vol. 2 No. 4, 2013, pp. 129-134. doi: 10.4236/ijohns.2013.24028.
 A. P. de Freitas Linhares Riello and E. M. Boasquevisque, “Anatomical Variants of the Ostiomeatal Complex: Tomographic Findings in 200 Patients,” Radiologia Brasileira, Vol. 41, No. 3, 2008, pp. 149-154.
 J. J. Ludwick, K. H. Taber, S. Manolidis, et al., “A Computed Tomographic Guide to Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: Axial and Coronal Views,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2002, pp. 317-322.
 A. Lactic, D. Milicic, K. Radmilovic, M. Delibegovic and J. Samardzic, “Paranasal Sinus CT Scan Findings in Patients with Chronic Sinonasal Symptoms,” Acta Informatica Medica, Vol. 18, No. 4, 2010, pp. 196-198.
 L. D. Dutra and E. Marchiori, “Tomografia Computadorizada Helicoidal dos Seios Paranasais na Criança: Avaliação das Sinusopatias Inflamatórias,” Radiologia Brasileira, Vol. 35, No. 3, 2002, pp. 161-169.
 I. Pérez-Piñas, J. Sabaté, A. Carmona, et al., “Anatomical Variations in the Human Paranasal Sinus Region Studied by CT,” Journal of Anatomy, Vol. 197, No. 2, 2000, pp. 221-227. doi:10.1017/S0021878299006500
 H. R. Stammberger and D. W. Kennedy, “Paranasal Sinuses: Anatomic Terminology and Nomenclature,” Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology Supplement, Vol. 167, No. 104, 1995, pp. 7-16.
 J. Earwaker, “Anatomic Variants in Sinonasal CT,” RadioGraphics, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1993, pp. 381-415.
 A. R. Talaiepour, A. A. Sazgar and A. Bagheri, “Anatomic Variations of the Paranasal Sinuses on CT Scan Images,” Journal of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2005, pp. 142-146.
 L. Badia, V. J. Lund, W. Wei and W. K. Ho, “Ethnic Variation in Sinonasal Anatomy on CT-Scanning,” Rhinology, Vol. 43, 2005, pp. 210-214.
 K. Dua, H. Chopra, A. S. Khurana and M. Munjal, “CT Scan Variations in Chronic Sinusitis,” Indian Journal of Radiology and Imaging, Vol. 15, No. 3, 2005, pp. 315-320. doi:10.4103/0971-3026.29144
 S. Lerdlum and B. Vachiranubhap, “Prevalence of Anatomic Variation Demonstrated on Screening Sinus Computed Tomography and Clinical Correlation,” Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand, Vol. 88, Suppl. 4, 2005, pp. S110-S115.
 F. Kasapoglu, S. Onart and O. Basut, “Preoperative Evaluation of Chronic Rhinosinusitis Patients by Conventional Radiographics, Computed Tomography and Nasal Endoscopy,” Kulak Burun Bogaz Ihtisas Dergisi, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2009, pp. 184-191.
 H. Mamatha, N. M. Shamasundar, M. B. Bharathi and L. C. Prasanna, “Variations of Osteomeatal Complex and Its Applied Anatomy: A CT Scan Study,” Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 8, 2010, pp. 904-907.
 A. K. Gupta, B. Gupta, N. Gupta and N. Gupta, “Computerized Tomography of Paranasal Sinuses: A Roadmap to Endoscopic Surgery,” Clinical Rhinology: An International Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1-10.
 W. E. Bolger, C. A. Butzin and D. S. Parsons, “Paranasal Sinus Bony Anatomic Variations and Mucosal Abnormalities: CT Analysis for Endoscopic Sinus Surgery,” Laryngoscope, Vol. 101, No. 1, 1991, pp. 56-64.
 A. Tonai and S. Baba, “Anatomic Variations of the Bone in Sinonasal CT,” Acta Otolaryngologica Supplement, Vol. 525, 1996, pp. 9-13.
 D. Sheetal, P. P. Devan, P. Manjunath, P. Martin, K. Satish Kumar, Sreekantha, T. G. Satisha and B. K. Manjunatha Goud, “CT PNS—Do We Really Require before FESS?” Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2011, pp. 179-181.
 P. Van der Veken, P. A. Clement, T. Buisseret, B. Desprechins, L. Kaufman and M. P. Derde, “CAT-Scan Study of the Prevalence of Sinus Disorders and Anatomical Variations in 196 Children,” Acta Othorhinolaryngologica Belgica, Vol. 43, No. 1, 1989, pp. 51-58 .
 N. Chaudhary, R. Kapoor, G. Motwani and S. C. Gandotra, “Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery Results in 69 Patients,” Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Vol. 52, No. 1, 1999, pp. 5-8.
 M. M. Kinsui, A. Guilherme and H. K. Yamashita, “Anatomical Variations and Sinusitis: A Computed Tomographic Study,” Revista Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia, Vol. 68, No. 5, 2002, pp. 642-652.
 P. Frosini, G. Picarella and E. De Campora, “Antrochoanal Polyp: Analysis of 200 Cases,” Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2009, pp. 21-26.