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.

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Tomographic Evaluation of Structural Variations of Nasal Cavity in Various Nasal Pathologies

  AUTHORS: Jyotirmoy Biswas, Chandrakant Y. Patil, Prasad T. Deshmukh, Rashmi Kharat, Vijayashree Nahata

  KEYWORDS: Structural Variations of Nasal Cavity; CT PNS; Concha Bullosa; Paradoxical Middle Turbinate

  JOURNAL NAME: International Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, Vol.2 No.4, July 2, 2013

  ABSTRACT: 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 the nasal septum and the middle turbinate.