» Articles » PMID: 34370074

The Role of Cochlear Implant Positioning on MR Imaging Quality: a Preclinical in Vivo Study with a Novel Implant Magnet System

Overview
Date 2021 Aug 9
PMID 34370074
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purposes: To investigate the effects for Ultra 3D cochlear implant (CI) positioning on MR imaging quality, looking at a comprehensive description of intracranial structures in cases of unilateral and bilateral CI placement.

Methods: Four CI angular positions (90°, 120°, 135° and 160°) at 9 cm distance from the outer-ear canal were explored. The 1.5 T MRI assessment included our institutional protocol for the investigation of brain pathologies without gadolinium application. Three investigators (two experienced neuroradiologists and one experienced otoneurosurgeon) independently evaluated the MR findings. A 4-point scale was adopted to describe 14 intracranial structures and to determine which CI positioning allowed the best image quality score and how bilateral CI placement modified MRI scan visibility.

Results: A high positive correlation was found between the three blinded observers. Structures situated contralateral from the CI showed high-quality values in all four placements. Structures situated ipsilaterally provided results suitable for diagnostic purposes for at least one position. At 90°, artifacts mainly involved brain structures located cranially and anteriorly (e.g., temporal lobe); on the contrary, at 160°, artifacts mostly influenced the posterior fossa structures (e.g., occipital lobe). For the bilateral CI condition, MR imaging examination revealed additional artifacts involving all structures located close to either CI, where there was a signal void/distortion area.

Conclusions: Suitable unilateral CI positioning can allow the visualization of intracranial structures with sufficient visibility for diagnostic purposes. Bilateral CI positioning significantly deteriorates the anatomical visibility. CI positioning might play a crucial role for patients who need post-operative MRI surveillance.

Citing Articles

Post mortem cadaveric and imaging mapping analysis of the influence of cochlear implants on cMRI assessment regarding implant positioning and artifact formation.

Arnold P, Fries L, Beck R, Granitzer S, Reich M, Aschendorff A Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024; .

PMID: 39738529 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-09164-0.


Cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear schwannomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of audiological outcomes.

Iannacone F, Rahne T, Zanoletti E, Plontke S Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2024; 281(12):6175-6186.

PMID: 38992191 PMC: 11564253. DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08818-3.


Multi-Magnet Cochlear Implant Technology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging: The Safety Issue.

Canzi P, Carlotto E, Zanoletti E, Frijns J, Borsetto D, Caruso A Audiol Res. 2024; 14(3):401-411.

PMID: 38804458 PMC: 11130805. DOI: 10.3390/audiolres14030034.


Current trends on subtotal petrosectomy with cochlear implantation in recalcitrant chronic middle ear disorders.

Canzi P, Berrettini S, Albera A, Barbara M, Bruschini L, Canale A Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2023; 43(Suppl. 1):S67-S75.

PMID: 37698103 PMC: 10159642. DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-suppl.1-43-2023-09.


The usefulness of the O-MAR algorithm in MRI skull base assessment to manage cochlear implant-related artifacts.

Canzi P, Carlotto E, Simoncelli A, Lafe E, Scribante A, Minervini D Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2023; 43(4):273-282.

PMID: 37488991 PMC: 10366562. DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-N2434.

References
1.
Sudhoff H, Gehl H, Scholtz L, Todt I . MRI Observation After Intralabyrinthine and Vestibular Schwannoma Resection and Cochlear Implantation. Front Neurol. 2020; 11:759. PMC: 7434924. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00759. View

2.
Todt I, Rademacher G, Grupe G, Stratmann A, Ernst A, Mutze S . Cochlear implants and 1.5 T MRI scans: the effect of diametrically bipolar magnets and screw fixation on pain. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018; 47(1):11. PMC: 5799898. DOI: 10.1186/s40463-017-0252-9. View

3.
Todt I, Rademacher G, Mittmann P, Wagner J, Mutze S, Ernst A . MRI Artifacts and Cochlear Implant Positioning at 3 T In Vivo. Otol Neurotol. 2015; 36(6):972-6. DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000000720. View

4.
Shew M, Wichova H, Lin J, Ledbetter L, Staecker H . Magnetic resonance imaging with cochlear implants and auditory brainstem implants: Are we truly practicing MRI safety?. Laryngoscope. 2018; 129(2):482-489. DOI: 10.1002/lary.27516. View

5.
Edmonson H, Carlson M, Patton A, Watson R . MR Imaging and Cochlear Implants with Retained Internal Magnets: Reducing Artifacts near Highly Inhomogeneous Magnetic Fields. Radiographics. 2018; 38(1):94-106. DOI: 10.1148/rg.2018170135. View