Performing MRI Scans on Cochlear Implant and Auditory Brainstem Implant Recipients: Review of 14.5 Years Experience.
Journal
Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology
ISSN: 1537-4505
Titre abrégé: Otol Neurotol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100961504
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2020
06 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
1
2020
medline:
15
4
2021
entrez:
28
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the complication rate of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using 1.5 T scanners on cochlear implant (CI) and auditory brainstem implant (ABI) recipients over 14.5 years. Prospective study conducted in a tertiary referral center for cochlear and auditory brainstem implantation, including patients with neurofibromatosis 2. The primary outcome was complications related to MRI scanning in implant recipients, including failure to complete MRI sessions. The secondary outcome was magnet void size due to MRI scanning with magnet in situ. Ninety-seven patients (21 ABI recipients, 76 CI recipients of whom 23 were bilateral) underwent a total of 428 MRI sessions consisting of 680 MRI procedures, which generated 2,601 MRI sequences (excluding localizers). Of these, 28/428 (6.5%) MRI sessions were performed with magnet removed, and the remaining 400/428 (93.4%) with the magnet in situ. The overall complication rate per session was 15/428 (3.5%). The majority of complications were accounted for by patient discomfort, in some cases requiring abandoning the scan session, but 5 magnet dislocations were also recorded. There were no cases of implant device failure or excessive demagnetization of the receiver stimulator magnet.For CI and ABI recipients, the implant caused large voids of around 110 mm × 60 mm with the magnet in situ which reduced to 60 mm × 30 mm when the magnet was removed. However, it was usually possible to visualize the internal acoustic meatus and cerebellopontine angle by positioning the implant package higher and further forward compared with conventional positioning. MRI scanning in ABI and CI recipients is generally safe and well tolerated without magnet removal, and carries a low rate of complications. However, patients should be fully informed of the possibility of discomfort, and precautions such as local anesthetic injection and head bandaging may reduce the likelihood of adverse events.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31985706
doi: 10.1097/MAO.0000000000002569
pii: 00129492-202006000-00017
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e556-e562Références
British Cochlear Implant Group 2017-2018 annual UK update. Available at: https://www.bcig.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2018.09.18-Report-to-Council-Data-Collection-FY17-18a.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2019.
Walton J, Donnelly NP, Tam YC, et al. MRI without magnet removal in neurofibromatosis type 2 patients with cochlear and auditory brainstem implants. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35:821–825.
Teissl C, Kremser C, Hochmair S, Hochmair-Desoyer I. Magnetic resonance imaging and cochlearimplants: Compatibility and safety aspects. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 9:26–38.
Tam YC, Graves MJ, Black RT, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with cochlear implants and auditory brain stem implants. Cochlear Implant Int 2010; 11:48–51.
Hassepass F, Stabenau V, Maier W, et al. Revision surgery due to magnet dislocation in cochlear implant patients: An emerging complication. Otol Neurotol 2014; 35:29–34.
Shew M, Wichova H, Lin J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging with cochlear implants and auditory brainstem implants: Are we truly practicing MRI safety? Laryngoscope 2019; 129:482–489.
Carlson ML, Neff BA, Link MJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging with cochlear implant magnet in place: Safety and imaging quality. Otol Neurotol 2015; 36:965–971.
Kim BG, Kim JW, Park JJ, et al. Adverse events and discomfort during magnetic resonance imaging in cochlear implant recipients. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015; 141:45–52.
Grupe G, Wagner J, Hofmann S, et al. Prevalence and complications of MRI scans of cochlear implant patients. HNO 2017; 65: (suppl 1): 35–40.
Pross SE, Ward BK, Sharon JD, et al. A prospective study of pain from magnetic resonance imaging with cochlear implant magnets in situ. Otol Neurotol 2017; 39:e80–e86.
Todt I, Tittel A, Ernst A, et al. Pain free 3T MRI scans in cochlear implantees. Otol Neurotol 2017; 38:e401–e404.
Cass N, Honce J, O’Dell A, Gubbels S. First MRI with new cochlear implant with rotatable internal magnet system and proposal for standardization of reporting magnet-related artifact size. Otol Neurotol 2019; 40:883–891.
Tysome J, Tam Y, Patterson I, et al. Assessment of a novel 3T MRI compatible cochlear implant magnet: Torque, forces, demagnetization and imaging. Otol Neurotol 2019; 40: e966–e974.
Todt I, Rademacher G, Grupe G, et al. Cochlear implants and 1.5T MRI scans: The effect of diametrically bipolar magnets and screw fixation on pain. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018; 47:11–14.