CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Annals of Otology and Neurotology 2021; 4(01): 006-010
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735992
Original Article

Cochlear Model for the Evaluation of MRI Sequences and Cochlear Implant Electrode Pattern at 3T

Lars Uwe Scholtz
1   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical School OWL, Bielefeld University, Campus Mitte, Klinikum Bielefeld, Germany
,
Conrad Riemann
1   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical School OWL, Bielefeld University, Campus Mitte, Klinikum Bielefeld, Germany
,
Hans Björn Gehl
2   Department of Radiology, Bielefeld University, Klinikum Bielefeld, Germany
,
Holger Sudhoff
1   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical School OWL, Bielefeld University, Campus Mitte, Klinikum Bielefeld, Germany
,
Ingo Todt
1   Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical School OWL, Bielefeld University, Campus Mitte, Klinikum Bielefeld, Germany
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Introduction Cochlear implant (CI) magnets and surgical techniques (e.g., positioning) have made an impact on the relationship between CI and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) by solving the problem of pain and artifact. Recent investigations displayed the possibility to evaluate the CI electrode position by MRI in vivo. However, further improved perceptual quality is needed to allow an improved evaluation of the electrode.

Aims The aim of this study was to assess a cochlear model for the examination of CI electrode pattern and MRI sequences in vitro.

Materials and Methods We investigated CI electrodes in a fluid-filled three-dimensional artificial scala tympani model combined with a fluid package in a 3T MRI scanner. Different high-resolution T2 sequences (0.6–0.2 mm voxel size) were used for the visual electrode pattern evaluation for finding an optimized sequence.

Results Artificial models can be used to evaluate MRI characteristics of CI electrodes. In our scanner configuration, a 0.3 mm voxel and 0.9 mm slice thickness sequence showed the best compromise between resolution and scanning time.

Conclusion and Significance MRI model-based testing can be performed in vitro to evaluate CI electrodes’ pattern and to optimize sequences. An MRI model is a tool for in vitro testing of MRI sequences and might help for future in vivo applications.



Publication History

Article published online:
21 September 2021

© 2021. Indian Society of Otology. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Kim BG, Kim JW, Park JJ, Kim SH, Kim HN, Choi JY. Adverse events and discomfort during magnetic resonance imaging in cochlear implant recipients. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015; 141 (01) 45-52
  • 2 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 (05) 821-825
  • 3 Stratmann A, Mittmann P, Rademacher G. et al. MRI-based estimation of scalar cochlear-implant electrode position. BioMed Res Int 2017; 2017: 6372704
  • 4 Tek F, MüLler S, Boga E. et al. 3T MRI-based estimation of scalar cochlear implant electrode position. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2019; 39 (04) 269-273
  • 5 Bartling SH, Gupta R, Torkos A. et al. Flat-panel volume computed tomography for cochlear implant electrode array examination in isolated temporal bone specimens. Otol Neurotol 2006; 27 (04) 491-498
  • 6 Roland Jr JT. A model for cochlear implant electrode insertion and force evaluation: results with a new electrode design and insertion technique. Laryngoscope 2005; 115 (08) 1325-1339
  • 7 Greene NT, Mattingly JK, Banakis Hartl RM, Tollin DJ, Cass SP. Intracochlear pressure transients during cochlear implant electrode insertion. Otol Neurotol 2016; 37 (10) 1541-1548
  • 8 Todt I, Mittmann P, Ernst A. Intracochlear fluid pressure changes related to the insertional speed of a CI electrode. BioMed Res Int 2014; 2014: 507241 DOI: 10.1155/2014/507241.
  • 9 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 (06) 965-971
  • 10 Edmonson HA, Carlson ML, Patton AC, Watson RE. MR imaging and cochlear implants with retained internal magnets: reducing artifacts near highly inhomogeneous magnetic fields. Radiographics 2018; 38 (01) 94-106
  • 11 Sudhoff H, Riemann C, Gehl HB. et al. MRI pattern of various cochlear implant electrodes in vivo Ann Otol Neurotol. 2020; doi: DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1708796.
  • 12 Scholtz LU, Gehl HB, Sudhoff H, et al. Estimation of different cochlear implant electrodes position in the human temporal bone by high resolution 3T MRI, LRO, 2018. Meeting of the German ENT Society, Erfurt. doi:10.1055/s-0038-1640587