Brian Walker1, Susan Norton2, Grace Phillips3, Erin Christianson4, David Horn5, Henry Ou5. 1. University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: ballenw@uw.edu. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA; Childhood Communication Center, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 4. Childhood Communication Center, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA. 5. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report and compare medical, radiological, and audiological outcomes in pediatric cochlear implant recipients who underwent 1.5 and 3 Tesla strength MRI with and without retained magnet. METHODS: Retrospective chart review at a tertiary care pediatric hospital and review of literature. Patients were identified via electronic medical records database search and were included if they had MRI after cochlear implant. RESULTS: Of twelve instances of MRI in pediatric cochlear implant recipients at our institution, two minor complications and one major complication were recorded. The rate of complication was equal between patients who underwent MRI with and without retained magnet. All minor complications resulted from MRI with retained magnet whereas the only major complication resulted from magnet removal. Two novel complications are reported, including: magnet removal resulting in silastic tear necessitating reimplantation and magnet dislocation with spontaneous reduction. Magnet removal significantly decreased the size of artifact, but did not alter the diagnostic utility of the MRI. While audiological measures varied chronologically from MRI scans, they did not appear to be appreciably altered by MRI. CONCLUSION: MRI with and without magnet retention appear to carry risks of both major and minor complications. For the regions of interest for each scan, MRI quality was not appreciably altered by magnet status. Audiological measures appear unaffected by magnet status during MRI however, this may reflect natural variation.
OBJECTIVE: To report and compare medical, radiological, and audiological outcomes in pediatric cochlear implant recipients who underwent 1.5 and 3 Tesla strength MRI with and without retained magnet. METHODS: Retrospective chart review at a tertiary care pediatric hospital and review of literature. Patients were identified via electronic medical records database search and were included if they had MRI after cochlear implant. RESULTS: Of twelve instances of MRI in pediatric cochlear implant recipients at our institution, two minor complications and one major complication were recorded. The rate of complication was equal between patients who underwent MRI with and without retained magnet. All minor complications resulted from MRI with retained magnet whereas the only major complication resulted from magnet removal. Two novel complications are reported, including: magnet removal resulting in silastic tear necessitating reimplantation and magnet dislocation with spontaneous reduction. Magnet removal significantly decreased the size of artifact, but did not alter the diagnostic utility of the MRI. While audiological measures varied chronologically from MRI scans, they did not appear to be appreciably altered by MRI. CONCLUSION: MRI with and without magnet retention appear to carry risks of both major and minor complications. For the regions of interest for each scan, MRI quality was not appreciably altered by magnet status. Audiological measures appear unaffected by magnet status during MRI however, this may reflect natural variation.
Authors: Paul van de Heyning; Griet Mertens; Vedat Topsakal; Ruben de Brito; Wilhelm Wimmer; Marco D Caversaccio; Stefan Dazert; Stefan Volkenstein; Mario Zernotti; Lorne S Parnes; Hinrich Staecker; Iain A Bruce; Gunesh Rajan; Marcus Atlas; Peter Friedland; Piotr H Skarzynski; Serafima Sugarova; Vladislav Kuzovkov; Abdulrahman Hagr; Robert Mlynski; Joachim Schmutzhard; Shin-Ichi Usami; Luis Lassaletta; Javier Gavilán; Benoit Godey; Christopher H Raine; Rudolf Hagen; Georg M Sprinzl; Kevin Brown; Wolf-Dieter Baumgartner; Eva Karltorp Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Asma Alahmadi; Saad Alenzi; Mohammed Alsheikh; Saeed Alghamdi; Mostafa E Morra; Khalid M Badr Journal: Saudi Med J Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 1.422