Literature DB >> 27525711

Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 1.5 Tesla With a Cochlear Implant Magnet in Place: Image Quality and Usability.

Jeffrey D Sharon1, Benjamin G Northcutt, Nafi Aygun, Howard W Francis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study the quality and usability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) obtained with a cochlear implant magnet in situ. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective chart review.
SETTING: Tertiary care center. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent brain MRI with a cochlear implant magnet in situ from 2007 to 2016. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Grade of view of the ipsilateral internal auditory canal (IAC) and cerebellopontine angle (CPA).
RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 765 image sequences in 57 MRI brain scans. For the ipsilateral IAC, significant predictors of a grade 1 (normal) view included: absence of fat saturation algorithm (p = 0.001), nonaxial plane of imaging (p = 0.01), and contrast administration (p = 0.001). For the ipsilateral CPA, significant predictors of a grade 1 view included: absence of fat saturation algorithm (p = 0.001), high-resolution images (p = 0.001), and nonaxial plane of imaging (p = 0.001). Overall, coronal T1 high-resolution images produced the highest percentage of grade 1 views (89%). Fat saturation also caused a secondary ring-shaped distortion artifact, which impaired the view of the contralateral CPA 52.7% of the time, and the contralateral IAC 42.8% of the time. MRI scans without any usable (grade 1) sequences had fewer overall sequences (N = 4.3) than scans with at least one usable sequence (N = 7.1, p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: MRI image quality with a cochlear implant magnet in situ depends on several factors, which can be modified to maximize image quality in this unique patient population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27525711     DOI: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000001176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Otol Neurotol        ISSN: 1531-7129            Impact factor:   2.311


  9 in total

Review 1.  The emerging role of hearing loss rehabilitation in patients with vestibular schwannoma treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery: literature review.

Authors:  Carlotta Morselli; N Boari; M Artico; M Bailo; L O Piccioni; I Giallini; M de Vincentiis; P Mortini; P Mancini
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 2.  [MRI in patients with auditory implants equipped with implanted magnets-an update : Overview and procedural management].

Authors:  S Nospes; M A Brockmann; A Läßig
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Impact of Cochlear Implant With Diametric Magnet on Imaging Access, Safety, and Clinical Care.

Authors:  Nancy M Young; Stephen R Hoff; Maura Ryan
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2020-06-22       Impact factor: 3.325

4.  MRI-induced artifact by a cochlear implant with a novel magnet system: an experimental cadaver study.

Authors:  Pietro Canzi; Federico Aprile; Anna Simoncelli; Marco Manfrin; Marianna Magnetto; Elvis Lafe; Domenico Minervini; Irene Avato; Simone Terrani; Andrea Scribante; Dzemal Gazibegovic; Marco Benazzo
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2020-11-18       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Hearing loss and intellectual outcome in children treated for embryonal brain tumors: Implications for young children treated with radiation sparing approaches.

Authors:  Iska Moxon-Emre; Christine Dahl; Vijay Ramaswamy; Ute Bartels; Uri Tabori; Annie Huang; Sharon L Cushing; Vicky Papaioannou; Normand Laperriere; Eric Bouffet; Donald J Mabbott
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 4.452

6.  Dimensions and forms of artefacts in 1.5 T and 3 T MRI caused by cochlear implants.

Authors:  Timo M Gottfried; Daniel Dejaco; Natalie Fischer; Veronika Innerhofer; Lejo Johnson Chacko; Gerlig Widmann; Christian Kremser; Herbert Riechelmann; Joachim Schmutzhard
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-22       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Diagnosing complications following cochlear implantation using transcutaneous ultrasound.

Authors:  Robin Rupp; Vivian Thimsen; Matthias Balk; Sarina K Mueller; Matti Sievert; Konstantinos Mantsopoulos; Ulrich Hoppe; Joachim Hornung; Heinrich Iro; Antoniu-Oreste Gostian
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-10-26       Impact factor: 3.236

8.  Influence of head orientation and implantation site of a novel transcutaneous bone conduction implant on MRI metal artifact reduction sequence.

Authors:  Emile Talon; Wilhelm Wimmer; Arsany Hakim; Claus Kiefer; Manuela Pastore-Wapp; Lukas Anschuetz; Georgios Mantokoudis; Marco D Caversaccio; Franca Wagner
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2022-01-24       Impact factor: 3.236

9.  The role of cochlear implant positioning on MR imaging quality: a preclinical in vivo study with a novel implant magnet system.

Authors:  Pietro Canzi; Marianna Magnetto; Anna Simoncelli; Marco Manfrin; Federico Aprile; Elvis Lafe; Elena Carlotto; Irene Avato; Andrea Scribante; Lorenzo Preda; Marco Benazzo
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-08-09       Impact factor: 2.503

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.