SpringerLink
Log in

Effect of head position on cochlear implant MRI artifact

  • Otology
  • Published:
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

A new generation of cochlear implant (CI) magnets and specific surgical techniques (e.g., implant positioning) has changed the relationship between a CI and magnet resonance imaging (MRI). MRI allows a pain free in vivo evaluation of the inner ear fluid state and internal auditory canal after the insertion of an electrode. The aim of this study is to evaluate how the patient’s head position in the MRI scanner influences the CI magnet-related artefact.

Methods

We performed in vivo measurement of MRI artefacts at 3 T with a CI system containing a bipolar diametrical magnet. The implant magnet was positioned with a head bandage at different positions from the nasion and external auditory canal in three volunteers. We used a turbo spin echo (TSE) T2w sequence on the axial and coronal planes and observed three positions: (1) regular position, (2) chin to chest (anteflexion), and (3) hyperextension (retroflexion).

Results

By comparing the positions, anteflexion of the cervical spine in a chin-to-chest position allowed us to place the artefact in a more apical position from the IAC in the coronal plane. The hyperextension of the cervical spine position shifts the artefact father towards the cochlea’s direction.

Conclusion

The head’s position can influence the location of MRI artefacts. In cases where the artefact diminished the IAC or cochlea, anteflexion of the cervical spine in the chin-to-chest position of the head in the MRI scanner should be attempted to allow a visualization of the IAC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Brazil)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Portnoy WM, Mattucci K (1991) Cochlear implants as a contraindication to magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 100(3):195–197

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Grupe G, Wagner J, Hofmann S, Stratmann A, Mittmann P, Ernst A et al (2016) Prevalence and complications of MRI scans of cochlear implant patients. HNO 64(3):156–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-016-0128-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hassepass F, Stabenau V, Maier W, Arndt S, Laszig R, Beck R, Aschendorff A (2014) Revision surgery due to magnet dislocation in cochlear implant patients: an emerging complication. OtolNeurotol 35(1):29–34. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0b013e3182a5d2c5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bo GK, ** WK, Jeong JP, Kim SH, Kim HN, Choi JY (2015) Adverse events and discomfort during magnetic resonance imaging in cochlear implant recipients. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 141(1):45–52. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoto.2014.2926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Todt I, Tittel A, Ernst A, Mittmann P, Mutze S (2017) Pain free 3 T MRI scans in cochlear implantees. Otol Neurotol 38(10):e401–e404. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Walton J, Donnelly NP, Chuen TY, Joubert I, Durie-Gair J, Jackson C et al (2014) MRI without magnet removal in neurofibromatosis type 2 patients with cochlear and auditory brainstem implants. OtolNeurot 35:821–825. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000000330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Todt I, Rademacher G, Mittmann P, Wagner J, Mutze S, Ernst A (2015) MRI artifacts and cochlear implant positioning at 3 T in vivo. OtolNeurotol 36(6):972–976. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000000720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Stratmann A, Mittmann P, Rademacher G, Grupe G, Hoffmann S, Mutze S, Ernst A, Todt I (2017) MRI-based estimation of scalar cochlear-implant electrode position. Biomed Res Int 2017:6372704. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6372704

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Tek F, Müller S, Boga E, Gehl HB, Seitz D, Scholtz LU, Sudhoff H, Todt I (2019) 3 T high resolution MRI based estimation of scalar cochlear implant electrode position. Acta Otol Ital 39:269–273. https://doi.org/10.14639/0392-100X-2309

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sudhoff H, Gehl HB, Scholtz LU, Todt I (2020) MRI observation after intralabyrinthine and vestibular schwannoma resection and cochlear implantation. Front Neurol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.00759

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Grupe G, Rademacher G, Hofmann S, Stratmann A, Mittmann P, Ernst A et al (2017) Evaluation of cochlear implant receiver position and its temporal changes. Otol Neurotol 38(10):e558–e562. https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000001521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Klinikum Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany

    H. B. Gehl

  2. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Klinikum Bielefeld, Teutoburgerstr. 50, 33604, Bielefeld, Germany

    N. Ay, H. Sudhoff & I. Todt

Authors
  1. N. Ay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. B. Gehl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Sudhoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. I. Todt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. Todt.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ay, N., Gehl, H.B., Sudhoff, H. et al. Effect of head position on cochlear implant MRI artifact. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 278, 2763–2767 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06349-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06349-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation