Lela Migirov1, Jona Kronenberg. 1. Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel. kro@zahav.net.il
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe a rare complication of cochlear implantation, such as magnet displacement. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: The study was conducted at the Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Aviv, Israel. PATIENTS: One child presented with an external coil attached to the skin anteriorly to the receiver/stimulator site (20 months after implantation) and another child was seen with a displaced magnet under the skin a few days after a head trauma (28 months after implantation). Both children were implanted with the Nucleus 24 device at the age of 2 years. INTERVENTION: Plain skull radiographs showed the dislocated magnet in both cases. Surgery for each child was limited to revision of the receiver/stimulator site and reinsertion of the magnet to its pocket. RESULTS: Intraoperative Neural Response Telemetry well displayed the responses of evoked potentials of the auditory nerve within the cochlea in both children. Postoperative auditory responses were as good as those measured before the complication. CONCLUSION: The displaced magnet can be successfully managed by a simple revision procedure. The possibility of magnet migration should be considered in cases of device malfunction. Two cases of magnet migration from its pocket after cochlear implantation are presented. The diagnostic and surgical method used for resolving this condition are described.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a rare complication of cochlear implantation, such as magnet displacement. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: The study was conducted at the Sheba Medical Center, Tel-Aviv, Israel. PATIENTS: One child presented with an external coil attached to the skin anteriorly to the receiver/stimulator site (20 months after implantation) and another child was seen with a displaced magnet under the skin a few days after a head trauma (28 months after implantation). Both children were implanted with the Nucleus 24 device at the age of 2 years. INTERVENTION: Plain skull radiographs showed the dislocated magnet in both cases. Surgery for each child was limited to revision of the receiver/stimulator site and reinsertion of the magnet to its pocket. RESULTS: Intraoperative Neural Response Telemetry well displayed the responses of evoked potentials of the auditory nerve within the cochlea in both children. Postoperative auditory responses were as good as those measured before the complication. CONCLUSION: The displaced magnet can be successfully managed by a simple revision procedure. The possibility of magnet migration should be considered in cases of device malfunction. Two cases of magnet migration from its pocket after cochlear implantation are presented. The diagnostic and surgical method used for resolving this condition are described.
Authors: Corina Wild; John Allum; Rudolf Probst; Daniel Abels; Claude Fischer; Daniel Bodmer Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.503