<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJRad</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Radiology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2164-3024</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojrad.2020.103016</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJRad-103098</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Physics&amp;Mathematics</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Non-Traumatic Chronic Nasosinusitis Disorders: Clinical and Computed Tomodensitometric Aspects in Cotonou in Benin, West Africa
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Patricia</surname><given-names>Yekpe Ahouansou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Djivèdé</surname><given-names>Akanni</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Alexis</surname><given-names>Dos Santos</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Sonia</surname><given-names>Adjadohoun</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kofi</surname><given-names>Mensa Savi de Tovè</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Olivier</surname><given-names>Biaou</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Vicentia</surname><given-names>Boco</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Radiology and Medical Imaging Department, Teaching University Hospital of Hubert Koutoukou Maga (CNHU/HKM) Cotonou, Benin</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Radiology, University Teaching Hospital of Borgou Department, Parakou, Benin</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff3"><addr-line>Otorhinolaryngology (ENT) and Cervico Facial Surgery (CFS) Department, Army Training Hospital, Teaching University Hospital, Cotonou, Benin</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>08</day><month>07</month><year>2020</year></pub-date><volume>10</volume><issue>03</issue><fpage>159</fpage><lpage>172</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>19,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2020</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21,</day>	<month>September</month>	<year>2020</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24,</day>	<month>September</month>	<year>2020</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Introduction: Damage to the nasal cavities and sinuses of the face concern many disciplines, especially the specialist in Otorhinolaryngology and Cervi-cal-Facial Surgery (ENT-CFS), since most symptoms have little value to direct the patient towards a precise diagnosis, radiological exploration, including three-dimensional imaging, provides diagnostic, therapeutic and follow-up support. The aim is to study the clinical and computed tomography scan as-pects of non-traumatic chronic nasosinusitis disorders at the Teaching Univer-sity Hospital of Hubert Koutoukou Maga (CNHU/HKM) in Cotonou. Materi-al and 
  Method: It was a descriptive and analytical study with retrospective collection, carried out over a period of 36 months from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2016; on 261 files of patients seen in Otorhinolaryngology (ENT) and Cervico Facial Surgery (CFS) consultating for a chronic nasosinusi-tis disorder with no trauma notion and having performed a CT scan. 
  Results: Chronic lesions of the nasal sinus cavities accounted for 13.42% of ENT con-sultations. There was female predominance with a sex ratio of 0.85. The clinic varied, the most common signs were rhinorrhea (74%), headache (73.6%) and sneezing (38.3%). On computed tomography scan, 225 results were pathologi-cal. Sinus backfilling was in the lead with 66.7% followed by mucous thicken-ing with 60.44%, and by bone involvement in 28%. Inflammatory pathologies (82.22%) were on top of the list, followed by pseudo-tumoral pathologies (20.9%). The anterior sinus complex was the most affected (56%) with predominance of the maxillary sinuses. 
  Conclusion: chronic nasosinusitis dis-orders are frequent in daily practice, with a varied clinic. Computed tomogra-phy scan is a major diagnostic tool that should be favored.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Chronic Nasosinusitis Disorder</kwd><kwd> Computed Tomography</kwd><kwd> CNHU/HKM</kwd><kwd> Cotonou</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The management of the nasal cavities and sinuses diseases requires clinical and paraclinical specialties. Nasosinusitis pathologies are on top of the list of Otorhinolaryngology diseases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref2">2</xref>] and their prevalence varies from one country to another. They reached 37.98% in Guinea in 2014 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref1">1</xref>] and 38.65% in Senegal in 2017 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref3">3</xref>].</p><p>Their impacts on social, economic, physical and psychological life are considerable, especially when the disease is chronic [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref5">5</xref>]. The management of Chronic Inflammatory Rhino-Sinusitis (CRS) alone is estimated at 8.6 billion dollars ($) per year in the USA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref6">6</xref>]. If they can be detected clinically, imaging is necessary to determine the lesions and their topography. Computed tomography (CT) has shown to be a non-invasive and reliable means of exploring nasal cavities and sinuses [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref7">7</xref>]. It helps to have a precise lesion assessment and search for the underlying anatomical factor of chronicity. The current study evaluated the prevalence of non-traumatic chronic sinusitis diseases, their clinical and computed tomography aspects at the Teaching University Hospital of Hubert Koutoukou Maga (CNHU/HKM) in Cotonou. Similar studies have been carried out, but they have been generally focused on nasosinusitis ENT pathologies including trauma, either only on posterior damage, or only on clinical and epidemiological aspects.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Material and Methods</title><p>This was a descriptive and analytical study with retrospective collection from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2016. We included patients with non-traumatic chronic nasal sinus conditions that last more than 12 weeks who had consulted in the department of ENT and Cervico and Facial Surgery (CFS) during the period of study at the CNHU/HKM. The sampling was exhaustive. The medical records included clinical data and the CT report. The computed tomography images were obtained using the Emotion Siemens Somaton 16-bar scanner started in December 2013. These CT images were retrieved and then reinterpreted by a radiologist with consideration of all the anatomical variants. The variables studied were socio-demographic, clinical and computed tomography data namely the age, sex, clinical data including functional and physical signs, data from computed tomography which are the lesions found and their characteristic aspects. We reviewed and counted all the patients’ consultation sheets from 2014 to 2016 in ENT department, and the patients’ records with nasosinusal disease were retained provided that they met the above-mentioned inclusion criteria. In addition, we performed a review of the CT scans. The results of the anatomopathological examination were recorded in the medical files for cases that had undergone surgery or biopsies. This information was collected using a survey form that had been drawn up beforehand. Data entry, processing and statistical analysis were performed using Epidata 3.1 and SPSS version 22.0 software. The significance threshold was set at 5%.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><p>During the period of study, we collected 7412 files, including 995 patients, accounting for a prevalence of 13.42% with non-traumatic chronic involvement of the nasal cavities and sinuses. Among them, 261 subjects had performed a CT scan of the sinuses, constituting our population of study.</p><p>1) Age and sex ratio</p><p>Young adults were mostly affected and 19.20% of patients were in the age group of 40 to 49 years old. The average age was 41.97 &#177; 17.45 years old with extremes of 4 to 86 years old. A higher frequency was found in women with a sex ratio of 0.85 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>).</p><p>2) Clinic</p><p>Functional signs (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>)</p><p>In addition, a ground of nasal sinus allergy was found in 36.8% of cases.</p><p>Rhinorrhea was present in 74%, accounting for 193 patients, of which 26.1% of anterior location, followed by headache in 73.6%, accounting for 192 patients, then nasal obstruction in 60.1%, accounting for 157 subjects, followed by signs of nasal irritation (sneezing in 38.3%, smell disorder in 27.9% and itching in 24.5%).</p><p>Physical signs (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>)</p><p>Nasal Congestion was the most common physical sign (65.9%; 172 cases), followed by pallor of the pituitary (31.4%; 82 cases) and deviation of the nasal septum (19.2%; 50 cases).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to the functional signs</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Size (S)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Rhinorrhea</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Anterior</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Posterior</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mixed</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Headache</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >192</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Nasal Obstruction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Unilateral</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bilateral</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >A bascule</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sneezing</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Smell disorder</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Itching</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Epistaxis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Facial pain</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Paraesthesia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Reflex otalgia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cough</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Eye Pain</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of patients according to physical signs</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Size (S)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Nasal Congestion</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >172</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.9</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pallor of the pituitary</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Deviation of the nasal septum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.2</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pus in the nasal cavity</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cervical lymph adenopathy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >38</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Polyp/Mass of the Nasal cavity</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Others*</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.7</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>*Facial deformation (18; 6.9%); Fever (16; 6.1%); Exophthalmos (12; 4.6%); Mass of oral cavity (11; 4.2%); V involvement (5; 1.9%).</p><p>3) Computed tomography data</p><p>Out of the 261 computed tomography examinations, 225 were pathological; 22 subjects had chronic involvement of the nasosinusitis cavities discovered fortuitously on computed tomography. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> summarizes the various involvement observed.</p><p>The damage to the nasal cavities and sinuses seen on the CT scan were manifold.</p><p>Sinus backfilling was the most visualized involvement (66.67%), followed by mucous thickening (60.40%) and bone involvement (28%) with lyses predominance.</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of nasal sinus lesions objectified by computed tomography</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Size (S)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Backfilling</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >150</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >66.67</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mucous tickening</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >136</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >60.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bone involvement</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >63</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Turbinal hypertrophy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Presence of calcification</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Enlargement of the middle meatus</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.22</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ostial Obstruction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Presence of hydroaeric level</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Septal Perforation</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.44</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Thinning of the nasal septum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.44</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Dehiscence/orbital wall</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.44</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Diagnoses retained on CT (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>)</p><p>Inflammatory involvement accounted for 82.22% including chronic rhinosinusitis, followed by pseudo-tumoral pathologies 19.11% and tumoral 14.2%.</p><p>Non-invasive fungal rhino sinusitis dominated, accounting for 10.22% of the infectious inflammatory pathology.</p><p>Location of nasal sinus involvement</p><p>The anterior sinus complex was the most affected (56%) with a predominance of the maxillary sinuses and laterality on the right.</p><p>Figures 2-5 illustrate some aspects of computed tomography.</p><p>Anatomical variants</p><p>Among the 261 computed tomography scans performed, some (N = 88) presented anatomical variants which have been reported in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>.</p><p>The same subject could present several normal variants.</p><p>The deviation of the nasal septum was the most common 17.6%, followed by Sinus septum 13.4% and Concha bullosa 10.7%.</p><p>4) Validity of the CT compared to the clinic (Tables 6-9)</p><p>Clinical-CIP crossed on CT Sensitivity = 46.9% Specificity = 68.1% PPV = 64.8% NPV = 50.6%.</p><p>The judgments converge (kappa index = 0.145; p-value = 0.014) but of low intensity.</p><p>Clinical-IP crossed on CT Sensitivity = 53.8% Specificity = 78.8% PPV = 30.9% NPV = 90.7%.</p><p>The judgments converge (kappa index = 0.250; p-value = 0.00) but of low intensity.</p><p>Clinical-TP crossed on CT Sensitivity = 56.3% Specificity = 99.6% PPV = 94.7% NPV = 94.2%.</p><p>The judgments converge (kappa index = 0.676; p-value = 0.000) but with a strong intensity.</p><p>Clinical-STP crossed on CT Sensitivity = 29.8% Specificity = 98.6% PPV = 82.4% NPV = 86.5%.</p><p>The judgments converge (kappa index = 0.378; p-value = 0.000) but with low intensity.</p><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution of diagnoses retained on the computed tomography</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Size (N)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Inflammatory Pathology</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Chronicrhinitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.44</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Chronic rhino-sinusitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >144</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Infectious Pathology</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Invasive fungal Rhino sinusitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Non invasive fungal Rhino sinusitis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.22</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bacterial Suppuration</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="5"  >Pseudo-tumors</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Naso-sinusitis Polyposis</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Killian’s Polyp</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sinus polyp</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.33</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Cyst et pseudo cyst</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mucocele</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.78</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="4"  >Benign Tumors</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Fibrous Dysplasia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Inverted Papilloma</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.44</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Osteoma</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.11</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ossifying Fibroma</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Malignanttumors + anatomopathology</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.89</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Distribution according to anatomical variants</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variants</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Size (N)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Percentage (%)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Deviation of nasal septum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.6</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sinus septum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >134</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Concha bullosa</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sinus agenesia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Sphenoide procidence of internal carotid</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Maxillary sinus Hypoplasia</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Haller’s Cell</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Spur of the nasal septum</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.5</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pneumatization of the unciform process</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.1</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Asymmetry of the ethmoidal roof</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Enlarged ethmoid bubble</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Hypopneumatization of frontal sinuses</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table6" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table6">Table 6</xref></label><caption><title> Clinical chronic inflammatory pathology (CIP) crossed on CT</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"   rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >CIP-CT</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="6"  >Clinical-CIP</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >105</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical CIP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >64.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.2%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in CIP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.9%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.9%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40.2%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >79</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >156</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical CIP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.4%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.6%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in CIP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.1%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68.1%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59.8%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"   rowspan="3"  >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >145</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >116</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >261</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical CIP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55.6%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44.4%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in CIP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1000%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table7" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table7">Table 7</xref></label><caption><title> Clinical infectious pathology (IP) crossed on CT</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"   rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >IP-CT</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="6"  >Clinical-IP</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >68</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical IP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >30.9%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >69.1%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1000%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in IP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >53.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21.2%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.1%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >175</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >193</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical IP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.3%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90.7%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in IP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46.2%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >78.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >73.9%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"   rowspan="3"  >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >222</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >261</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical IP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.9%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >85.1%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in IP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1000%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table8" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table8">Table 8</xref></label><caption><title> Clinical tumoral pathology (TP) crossed on CT</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"   rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >TP-CT</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="6"  >Clinical TP</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in clinical TP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.7%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.3%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in TP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56.3%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.3%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >228</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >242</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in clinical TP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >94.2%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in TP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >43.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >99.6%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >92.7%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"   rowspan="3"  >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >229</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >261</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in clinical TP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.3%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >87.7%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in TP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table9" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table9">Table 9</xref></label><caption><title> Clinical pseudo-tumoral pathology crossed on CT</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"   rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >STP-CT</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  >Total</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >No</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="6"  >Clinical STP</td><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Yes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical-STP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82.4%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17.6%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in STP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.8%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.4%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.5%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >No</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >211</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >244</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical-STP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86.5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in STP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70.2%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98.6%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >93.5%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"   rowspan="3"  >Total</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Size</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >214</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >261</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in Clinical-STP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >% in STP-CT</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >100.0%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>In our study, the prevalence of non-traumatic chronic nasal sinus disease accounted for 13.31%. The results are similar to those of Samak&#233; et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref8">8</xref>] in 2013 in Bamako which was 12.62% over a period of 6 months. An overall prevalence of nasosinusitis disorders found in Cameroon in 2013 by Njifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref2">2</xref>] was 35.24% and 38.65% in Senegal in 2017 by Tall et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref3">3</xref>]. These rates, certainly higher than ours, could be explained by the inclusion of traumatic causes; but conveying the same idea, putting nasosinusitis disorders on top of ENT pathologies.</p><p>1) Sociodemographic characteristics</p><p>Sex ratio was 0.85 with higher frequency in women. The average age was 41.97 &#177; 17.45 years old with extremes of 4 to 86 years old. The age group of 40 to 49 years old was the most affected in 19.20%. Njifou [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref2">2</xref>] reported extremes from 1 day to 86 years old, with a predominance of the age group of 16 to 40 years old accounting for 52.09%. Attifi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref1">1</xref>], in Guinea reported an average age of 33 years old with extremes of 9 months to 73 years old and a predominance of conditions in the age group of 20 to 29 years old. Chronic nasal sinus diseases mainly affect young people, though literature reports age groups below ours. Indeed, other studies have broadened their etiologies to traumatic cause’s apanage of young people.</p><p>2) Clinical data</p><p>The clinic was polymorphic, the frequent symptoms were in more or less equal proportion rhinorrhea (74%) and headache (73.6%), followed by nasal obstruction (60.1%). Headache was the main reason for requesting and performing scanner. Finding corroborated by Yekpe Ahouansou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref9">9</xref>] in 2015 in a study on posterior rhinosinusitis, accounting for 28% of cases. Unlike Adjibabi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref10">10</xref>] for whom rhinorrhea came first followed by headaches. The essentially clinical nature of his study could explain that order. Nasal congestion was by far the most objectified physical sign (65.9%).</p><p>3) Computed tomography data</p><p>Among the pathological computed tomography examinations, 22 presented a chronic involvement of nasal sinus cavities, fortuitously seen on computed tomography. Stankiewicz et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref11">11</xref>] found in their study that more than half of symptomatic patients (53%) taken in the context of rhinosinusitis had a negative CT scan. There was also no real difference in the severity of symptoms between patients with a positive and negative CT scan. Dubin et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref12">12</xref>] have also reported nearly half of the asymptomatic patients in a population with chronic rhinosinusitis on computed tomography.</p><p>Several nasosinusitis lesions can be visualized on computed tomography in the same patient at various degrees. The Sinusitis backfilling was found in 150 patients (66.66%), followed by mucous thickening in 136 patients (60.44%) and bone involvements were found in 63 patients (28%), dominated by bone lysis and osteosclerosis. Studies have shown that almost all patients with purulent discharge from the nasal cavities or the presence of nasal polyps on physical examination have CT images of CRS, while about half of those with mucosal edema and minimal secretions at the clinic have visible sinus involvement [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref13">13</xref>].</p><p>Two hundred and twenty-five CT diagnoses were made. CRS was diagnosed in 144 patients (64%). According to Ndjifou et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref2">2</xref>], rhino-sinusitis was the most frequent pathology in 19.45% (627 patients) of ENT diseases in Douala. Its prevalence in Korea was 6.95% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref14">14</xref>]. The overall prevalence of CRS in 2012 was 10.9% in a multicenter study conducted in 12 European countries on adults [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref15">15</xref>].</p><p>Infectious involvement was found in 40 patients (17.8%), mainly fungal infections (12%) retained on the basis of the presence of calcification within a sinus opacity. Aspergillary rhinosinusitis was the most common one. The literature review of Vogiatzi et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref16">16</xref>] revealed a prevalence of 2% in France; it almost exclusively affects adults, with a higher incidence in older patients and a sex ratio of two women for one man. The invasive form of the disease is mainly described in subjects with compromised immunity.</p><p>Pseudo-tumoral pathology was found in 19.11% with nasosinus polyps in the forefront, then followed cysts and pseudo cysts. The polyps are relatively common in the literature. Ouedraogo in Burkina Fasso [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref17">17</xref>], Atifi in Morocco [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref18">18</xref>], Frosini et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref19">19</xref>] in Italy, Adnane et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref20">20</xref>] and Bozzo et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref21">21</xref>] many more in children. In the literature, recurrence has been frequently described. Cysts and pseudo-cysts are secondary cavities developed within the sinuses and bordered by an epithelial wall unrelated to its content, which may be liquid or semi-liquid [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref22">22</xref>]. In 9% to 35% of cases according to the literature, these were sequelae of inflammatory damage, particularly dental damage, generally without pathological nature [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref23">23</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref24">24</xref>].</p><p>Among nasosinusitis tumors (14.2%), the benign form was mostly found with the most common sinus cavities osteoma. It is found in 3.1% of cases. However, its incidence is estimated at 0.4% in a series comprising 16.000 sinus images [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref25">25</xref>]. It is found in the frontal sinus (50%), in the ethmoidal cells (40%) or more rarely in the maxillary sinus (6%) or sphenoidal (4%); 03 cases of orbital extension have been described in Morocco by Krimissa et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref26">26</xref>] causing orbital and nerve complications.</p><p>Among the anatomical variants presumed to be the cause of sinus containment, deviation of the nasal septum was the most common in 17.6% of cases. A Korean study [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref27">27</xref>] carried out only on adult subjects found it in 44.8% of cases. The prevalence of deviation of the nasal septum with an obstructive symptom was 2.1%. This difference in proportion between the two studies could be linked to the enrolled size (8.845 Koreans). In the literature, the frequency of deviation of the nasal septum would be between 20% and 62% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref28">28</xref>]. Frequent associations of variants at risk of containment can promote chronic rhinosinusitis such as conchabullosa and deviation of the nasal septum [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref29">29</xref>]. No statistical implication was found between the anatomic variants presumed to be at risk of containment and chronic rhinosinusitis according to Smith et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref30">30</xref>]. The frequency of conchabullosa in the literature is higher than 30% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref28">28</xref>], compared to this study (10.7%)]. The presence of conchabullosa and/or septal deviation does not result in the development of maxillary rhinosinusitis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.103098-ref31">31</xref>]. However, their existence deserves to be searched.</p><p>From the various validity tests of the computed tomography compared to the clinic, it appears that for the chronic inflammatory pathology with Ss = 46.9%, Sp = 68.1% a PPV = 64.8% and NPV = 50.6%, that for infectious pathology with Ss = 53.8%, Sp = 78.8% PPV = 30.9% and NPV = 90.7% and pseudo-tumor and tumor pathology with respectively a Ss = 29.8%, Sp = 98.6% a PPV = 82.4% and NPV = 86.5%; Ss = 56.3%, Sp = 99.6% a PPV = 94% and NPV = 94.2% the diagnosis with CT keeps the foreground over that done clinically, with converging judgments even with low intensity; except for tumor pathology where the intensity was higher.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Limitations of the Study</title><p>These are those relating to any retrospective recruitment. In some patients, important informations were missing from the medical records that would allow their inclusion in the study; particularly the conclusions of the clinical examination, the results of the scans and the histology. Indeed, the drafting of files is done either by medical students or nurses who unfortunately trivialize certain key aspects of the anamnesis and record keeping. The lack of archiving and data storage in the imaging department made impossible the reinterpretation of some of the images making access to some of the CT images impossible. Like in many countries in the sub-region, access to hospital digitization and archiving systems is still utopian. In addition, some requested scanner and histology examinations have not been carried out due to lack of financial resources. These various aspects have considerably reduced the number of patients included in our study with a low number of scan results found, especially with regard to the study of anatomical variants.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Conclusion</title><p>Nasal cavities and sinuses pathologies are the prerogative of daily medical practice. When they become persistent, they very often require a computed tomography which is a reliable examination of accurate diagnostic and therapeutic orientation.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Ahouansou, P.Y., Akanni, D., Santos, A.D., Adjadohoun, S., Gbaguidi, B., de Tov&#232;, K.M.S., Biaou, O. and Boco, V. (2020) Non-Traumatic Chronic Nasosinusitis Disorders: Clinical and Computed Tomodensitometric Aspects in Cotonou in Benin, West Africa. Open Journal of Radiology, 10, 159-172. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2020.103016</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.103098-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Attifi, H., Hmidi, M., Boukhari, A., Touihem, N., Kehani, M., Zalagh, M., et al. (2014) Expérienceoto-rhino-laryngologique de l’h&amp;#244;pital marocaine de campagne en Guinée Conakry. The Pan African Medical Journal, 19, 40.  
https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2014.19.40.4908</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Njifou, N.A., Ndjock, R., Essama, L., Moby, H., Motah, M., Fonyam, V., et al. (2013) Profil de la pathologie ORL à l'h&amp;#244;pital Laquinitinie de douala. Médecined’Afrique Noire, 60, 416-418.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tall, H., Lamarti, I., Ndiaye, M. and Diallo, B.K. (2017) Pathologie otorhinolaryngologique (ORL) au Centre hospitalier régional de Louga (Sénégal). Profil épidémiologique et clinique. Revue Internationale des Sciences Médicales, African Index Medicus, 19, 135-138.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Tania, S. and Olavo, M. (2010) Allergic Rhinitis in the Child and Associated Comorbidities. Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, 21, 107-113.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3038.2009.00933.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Anand, V.K. (2004) Epidemiology and Economic Impact of Rhinosinusitis. The Annals of Otology Rhinology Laryngology, 193, 3-5.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894041130S502</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bhattacharyya, N. (2008) Relationship between Mucosal Inflammation, Computed Tomography, and Symptomatology in Chronic Rhinosinusitis without Polyposis. Annals of Otology, Rhinology, and Laryngology, 117, 517-522.  
https://doi.org/10.1177/000348940811700709</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Martin-Duverneuil, N., Sahli-Amor, M. and Chiras, J. (2008) Anatomie et imagerie du massif facial normal chez l’adulte. Encycl Méd Chir (Elsevier Masson SAS, Paris). Radiodiagnostic-Squelette Normal-Neuroradiologie-Appareil locomoteur. 310-330.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Samaké, D., MaIga, Y.M., Sidibé, Y., Thiocary, S., Dara, Y., Touré, S.S., et al. (2013) Aspects épidémiologiques et cliniques des pathologies naso-sinusiennes en consultation dans une structure de santé de proximité de Bamako. Médecine d’Afrique Noire, 6010, 415-418.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yekpe Ahouansou, H.P., Savi, D.E., Tove, K.M., Biaou, O., Adisso, L., Bonou, O., Tchaou, M., et al. (2015) Sinusites postérieures: Aspects épidémiologiques et tomodensitométriques à Cotonou. Journal Africaind’Imagerie Médical, 7, 217-222.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adjibabi, W., Biaou, O., Bio-tchane, I., Alamou, S., Chakibou, A., Boko, J., et al. (2002) Rhinosinusitepurulente en consultation. ORL de ville Le Bénin médicale, 22, 35-38.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stankiewicz, J.A. and Chow, J.M. (2002) A Diagnostic Dilemma for Chronic Rhinosinusitis: Definition Accuracy and Validity. American Journal of Rhinology, 16, 199-202. https://doi.org/10.1177/194589240201600404</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dubin, M.G., Kuhn, F.A. and Melroy, C.T. (2007) Radiographic Resolution of Chronic Rhinosinusitis without Polyposis after 6 Weeks vs 3 Weeks of Oral Antibiotics. Annals of Allergy, Asthma &amp; Immunology, 98, 32-35.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1081-1206(10)60856-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Marple, B.F., Stankiewicz, J.A., Baroody, F.M., Chow, J.M., Conley, D.B., Corey, J.P., et al. (2009) Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis in Adults. Postgraduate Medicine, 121, 121-136. https://doi.org/10.3810/pgm.2009.11.2081</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nanayakkara, J.P., Igwe, C., Roberts, D. and Hopkins, C. (2013) The Impact of Mental Health on Chronic Rhinosinusitis Symptom Scores. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 270, 1361-1364.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-012-2230-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fokkens, W.J., Lund, V.J., Mullol, J., Bachert, C., Alobid, I., Baroody, F., et al. (2012) EPOS 2012: European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2012. Rhinology, 50, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino50E2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Vogiatzi, T., Kloukos, D., Scarfe, W.C. and Bornstein, M.M. (2014) Incidence of Anatomical Variations and Disease of the Maxillary Sinuses as Identified by Cone Beam Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review. The International Journal of Oral &amp; Maxillofacial Implants, 29, 1301-1314. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3644</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ouédraogo, B.P., Sereme, M., Gyebre, Y.M.C., Diallo, O., Ouattara, M. and Ouaba, K. (2011) Le polypeantrochoanal. A propos de deux cas cliniques. Médecine d’Afrique Noire, 5805, 237-240.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Attifi, H., Hmidi, M., Touihem, N., Zalagh, M. and Messary, A. (2014) Les polypes antrochoanaux: Etude retrospective à propos de 11 cas. Research fr, 1, 1071.  
http://www.research-journal.net/fr</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Frosini, P., Picarella, G. and De Campora, E. (2009) Antrochoanal Polyp: Analysis of 200 Cases. ACTA Otorhinolaryngologica Italica, 29, 21-26.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adnane, C., Adouly, T., Rouadi, S., Abada, R., Roubal, M. and Janah, A. (2014) Polype antrochoanal de l’enfant: Epidémiologie et prise en charge. Revue Marocaine de Santé publique, 1, 17-20.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bozzo, C., Garrel, R., Meloni, F., et al. (2007) Endoscopic Treatment of Antrochoanal Polyps. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 264, 145-150.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-006-0175-y</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chomette, G. and Auriol, M. (1985) Classification des tumeurs bénignes et des kystes des maxillaires. Revue de Stomatologie et de Chirurgie Maxillo-faciale, 86, 277-284.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ayache, D. and Bonfils, P.J. (2009) O.R.L. 5e édition, Med-Line, Paris.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Moulin, G., Pascal, T., Jacquier, A., Vidal, V., Facon, F., Dessi, P. and Bartoli, J.M. (2003) Imagerie des sinusites chroniques de l’adulte. Journal of Radiology, 84, 901-919.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chagnon, S., Badachi, Y. and Lacombe, P. (2002) Ostéome. Encycl Méd Chir (Editions Scienti&amp;#64257;ques et Médicales Elsevier SAS, Paris, tous droits réservés), Radiodiagnostic-Neuroradiologie-Appareil locomoteur, 31-483-A-10.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Krimissa, K., Nadef, N., Rafik, L., Mahtar, M., Kadiri, F., Aksim, M., et al. (2012) Les ostéomes sinusiens à extension orbitaire à propos de trois cas. Journal Tunisiend’ORL, 28, 56-58.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ahn, J.C., Lee, W.H., We, J., Rhee, C.S., Lee, C. and Kim, J.W. (2016) Nasal Septal Deviation with Obstructive Symptoms: Association Found with Asthma But Not with Other General Health Problems. American Journal of Rhinology &amp; Allergy, 30, 17-20. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2016.30.4277</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lehmann, P., Bouaziz, R., Page, C., Warin, M., Saliou, G., Deschepper, B., et al. (2009) Cavités sinusiennes de la face: Aspect scanographique des variantes anatomiques et leur risque chirurgical. Journal of Radiology, 90, 21-30.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0221-0363(09)70074-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sazgar, A.A., Massah, J., Sadeghi, M., Bagheri, A. and Rasool, F. (2008) The Incidence of Concha Bullosa and the Correlation with Nasal Septal Deviation. B-ENT, 4, 87-91.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Smith, K.D., Edwards, P.C., Saini, T.S. and Norton, N.S. (2010) The Prevalence of Concha Bullosa and Nasal Septal Deviation and Their Relationship to Maxillary Sinusitis by Volumetric Tomography. International Journal of Dentistry, 2010, Article ID: 404982. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/404982</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.103098-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hatipoglu, H.G., Cetin, M.A. and Yuksel, E. (2008) Nasal Septal Deviation and Concha Bullosa Coexistence: CT Evaluation. B-ENT, 4, 227-232.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>