Cargando…
Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size
INTRODUCTION: Recent developments regarding cochlear implant magnets (e.g., a bipolar diametral magnet) and refined surgical techniques (e.g., implant positioning) have had a significant impact on the relation between cochlear implants and MRIs, making the reproducible visibility of cochlea and IAC...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199598/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32420348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5086291 |
_version_ | 1783529178129235968 |
---|---|
author | Todt, I. Guerkov, R. Gehl, H. B. Sudhoff, H. |
author_facet | Todt, I. Guerkov, R. Gehl, H. B. Sudhoff, H. |
author_sort | Todt, I. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Recent developments regarding cochlear implant magnets (e.g., a bipolar diametral magnet) and refined surgical techniques (e.g., implant positioning) have had a significant impact on the relation between cochlear implants and MRIs, making the reproducible visibility of cochlea and IAC possible. MRI scanning has changed from a contraindication to a diagnostic tool. Magnet artifact size plays a central role in the visual assessment of the cochlea and IAC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the CI magnet-related maximum artifact sizes of various cochlea implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an in vivo measurement of MRI artifacts at 1.5 and 3 Tesla with three cochlear implant magnet systems (AB 3D, Medel Synchrony, and Oticon ZTI). The implant, including the magnet, was positioned with a head bandage 7.0 cm and 120° from the nasion, external auditory canal. We used a TSE T2w MRI sequence on the axial and coronal plains and compared the artifacts in two volunteers for each tesla strength. RESULTS: Intraindividual artifact size differences between the three magnets are smaller than interindividual maximum artifact size differences. 3 T MRI scans, in comparison to 1.5 T MRI scans, show a difference between soft artifact areas. CONCLUSION: We observed no major difference between maximum implant magnet artifact sizes of the three implant magnet types. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7199598 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71995982020-05-15 Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size Todt, I. Guerkov, R. Gehl, H. B. Sudhoff, H. Biomed Res Int Research Article INTRODUCTION: Recent developments regarding cochlear implant magnets (e.g., a bipolar diametral magnet) and refined surgical techniques (e.g., implant positioning) have had a significant impact on the relation between cochlear implants and MRIs, making the reproducible visibility of cochlea and IAC possible. MRI scanning has changed from a contraindication to a diagnostic tool. Magnet artifact size plays a central role in the visual assessment of the cochlea and IAC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the CI magnet-related maximum artifact sizes of various cochlea implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an in vivo measurement of MRI artifacts at 1.5 and 3 Tesla with three cochlear implant magnet systems (AB 3D, Medel Synchrony, and Oticon ZTI). The implant, including the magnet, was positioned with a head bandage 7.0 cm and 120° from the nasion, external auditory canal. We used a TSE T2w MRI sequence on the axial and coronal plains and compared the artifacts in two volunteers for each tesla strength. RESULTS: Intraindividual artifact size differences between the three magnets are smaller than interindividual maximum artifact size differences. 3 T MRI scans, in comparison to 1.5 T MRI scans, show a difference between soft artifact areas. CONCLUSION: We observed no major difference between maximum implant magnet artifact sizes of the three implant magnet types. Hindawi 2020-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7199598/ /pubmed/32420348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5086291 Text en Copyright © 2020 I. Todt et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Todt, I. Guerkov, R. Gehl, H. B. Sudhoff, H. Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title | Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title_full | Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title_short | Comparison of Cochlear Implant Magnets and Their MRI Artifact Size |
title_sort | comparison of cochlear implant magnets and their mri artifact size |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7199598/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32420348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2020/5086291 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT todti comparisonofcochlearimplantmagnetsandtheirmriartifactsize AT guerkovr comparisonofcochlearimplantmagnetsandtheirmriartifactsize AT gehlhb comparisonofcochlearimplantmagnetsandtheirmriartifactsize AT sudhoffh comparisonofcochlearimplantmagnetsandtheirmriartifactsize |