©The Author(s) 2016. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Commentary on: “Evaluation of variations in sinonasal region with computed tomography”
Can A Çağıcı, ENT Department, Baskent University Seyhan Hospital, 01150 Adana, Turkey
Author contributions: Çağıcı CA designed research, performed research, analyzed data, wrote the letter, and revised the letter.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The author declares that he has no conflicts of interest.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Correspondence to: Can A Çağıcı, MD, Associate Professor, ENT Department, Baskent University Seyhan Hospital, Gazipaşa Mahallesi Baraj Caddesi No. 7, Seyhan, 01150 Adana, Turkey. firstname.lastname@example.org
Telephone: +90-542-6878525 Fax: +90-322-4592622
Received: July 29, 2016
Peer-review started: July 31, 2016
First decision: September 2, 2016
Revised: September 19, 2016
Accepted: October 17, 2016
Article in press: October 18, 2016
Published online: December 28, 2016
TO THE EDITOR
I read the article by Dasar et al with great interest. The authors evaluated the paranasal sinus tomography of 400 patients to determine the frequency of each of 39 possible anatomic variations. Their study required a great deal of time and effort. Unfortunately, their definition of the secondary middle turbinate and the figure that showed its structure are incorrect.
The authors stated that the secondary middle turbinate is an accessory turbinate that is seen between the superior and middle turbinates. It should originate, however, from the middle meatus posterosuperior to the ethmoid infundibulum, not from between the middle and superior turbinates. The secondary middle turbinate is not part of the middle turbinate. The appearance of a secondary middle turbinate is probably due to the partial absence of the anterior wall of the ethmoidbulla.
Their figure 3D, which was used to illustrate the secondary middle turbinate, is also not appropriate. A sagittal cleft on the middle turbinate is seen in this figure, which is not an appropriate example for the secondary middle turbinate. The secondary middle turbinate is actually a bony prominence that extends from the lateral nasal wall to the middle meatus, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Secondary middle turbinate is apparent on the right side of the figure.
smt: Secondary middle turbinate; mt: Middle turbinate.
Manuscript source: Unsolicited manuscript
Specialty type: Radiology, nuclear medicine and medical imaging
Country of origin: Turkey
Peer-review report classification
Grade A (Excellent): A, A
Grade B (Very good): B, B
Grade C (Good): C, C
Grade D (Fair): 0
Grade E (Poor): 0
P- Reviewer: Chandra R, Lobo D, Rapidis AD, Shen J, Sali L, van Beek EJR S- Editor: Kong JX L- Editor: A E- Editor: Wu HL