Literature DB >> 11988249

Effect of MRI noise on cochlear function.

P Radomskij1, M A Schmidt, C W Heron, D Prasher.   

Abstract

A disadvantage of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the high level of noise produced (peaking between 122 dB and 131 dB). We used otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) as a method to quantify the effect of MRI-generated noise on the cochlea. OAEs were measured in 16 patients before and after MRI and in 16 controls. OAEs decreased in patients after MRI, but the controls, who were not exposed to MRI noise, showed no decrease over the same period. The change in OAEs shows a clear effect of MRI noise on cochlear function, despite use of earplugs. The importance of correctly fitted earplugs cannot be underestimated.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2002        PMID： 11988249     DOI： 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08423-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN： 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  9 in total

Review 1.  The challenges of neonatal magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Owen J Arthurs; Andrea Edwards; Topun Austin; Martin J Graves; David J Lomas
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-08-11

2.  Quiet PROPELLER MRI techniques match the quality of conventional PROPELLER brain imaging techniques.

Authors:  I Corcuera-Solano; A Doshi; P S Pawha; D Gui; A Gaddipati; L Tanenbaum
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  B1 -gradient-based MRI using frequency-modulated Rabi-encoded echoes.

Authors:  Efraín Torres; Taylor Froelich; Paul Wang; Lance DelaBarre; Michael Mullen; Gregory Adriany; Daniel Cosmo Pizetta; Mateus José Martins; Edson Luiz Géa Vidoto; Alberto Tannús; Michael Garwood
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2021-09-09       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 4.  3 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging noise in standard head and neck sequence does not cause temporary threshold shift in high frequency.

Authors:  Elizabeth Yenn Lynn Lim; Ing Ping Tang; Mohammadreza Peyman; Norlisah Ramli; Prepageran Narayanan; Raman Rajagopalan
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 5.  Cardiovascular magnetic resonance: Diagnostic utility and specific considerations in the pediatric population.

Authors:  Frances M Mitchell; Sanjay K Prasad; Gerald F Greil; Peter Drivas; Vassilios S Vassiliou; Claire E Raphael
Journal:  World J Clin Pediatr       Date:  2016-02-08

6.  Subjective discomfort in children receiving 3 T MRI and experienced adults' perspective on children's tolerability of 7 T: a cross-sectional questionnaire survey.

Authors:  I-Jun Chou; Christopher R Tench; Penny Gowland; Tim Jaspan; Rob A Dineen; Nikos Evangelou; Rasha Abdel-Fahim; William P Whitehouse; Cris S Constantinescu
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Hearing Thresholds Changes after MRI 1.5T of Head and Neck.

Authors:  Maryam Bahaloo; Mohammad Hossein Davari; Mohammad Sobhan; Seyyed Jalil Mirmohammadi; Mohammad Taghi Jalalian; Mohammad Javad Zare Sakhvidi; Farimah Shamsi; Sam Mirfendereski; Abolfazl Mollasadeghi; Amir Houshang Mehrparvar
Journal:  Radiol Res Pract       Date:  2019-06-17

8.  Does 3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging Have Adverse Effect on Cochlear Functions?

Authors:  Ugur Yildirim; Ozgur Kemal; Muzaffer Elmali; Figen Basar
Journal:  J Int Adv Otol       Date:  2021-09       Impact factor: 1.017

9.  Sensorineural hearing loss after magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Abolfazl Mollasadeghi; Amir Houshang Mehrparvar; Saeid Atighechi; Mohammad Hossein Davari; Pedram Shokouh; Mehrdad Mostaghaci; Maryam Bahaloo
Journal:  Case Rep Radiol       Date:  2013-06-17
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.