Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging in paediatric cochlear implant assessment: a pilot study and our experience at Great Ormond Street Hospital

  • H Kanona (a1), K Stephenson (a1), F D'Arco (a1), K Rajput (a1), L Cochrane (a1) and C Jephson (a1)...

Abstract

Background

To date, there is a lack of consensus regarding the use of both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-operative assessment of cochlear implant candidates.

Methods

Twenty-five patients underwent high-resolution computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. ‘Control scores’ describing the expected visualisation of specific features by computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were established. An independent radiological review of all computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging scan features was then compared to the control scores and the findings recorded.

Results

Agreement with control scores occurred in 83 per cent (20 out of 24) of computed tomography scans and 91 per cent (21 out of 23) of magnetic resonance imaging scans. Radiological abnormalities were demonstrated in 16 per cent of brain scans and 18 per cent of temporal bone investigations.

Conclusion

Assessment in the paediatric setting constitutes a special situation given the likelihood of congenital temporal bone abnormalities and associated co-morbidities that may be relevant to surgery and prognosis following cochlear implantation. Both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging contribute valuable information and remain necessary in paediatric cochlear implant pre-operative assessment.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: Dr Hala Kanona, Department of Otolaryngology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London WC1N 3JH, UK E-mail: hkanona@yahoo.co.uk

Footnotes

Hide All

Dr H Kanona takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

Presented at the British Association for Paediatric Otolaryngology Annual Meeting, 16 September 2016, Liverpool, UK.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
1Young, JY, Ryan, ME, Young, NM. Preoperative imaging of sensorineural hearing loss in pediatric candidates for cochlear implantation. Radiographics 2014;34:E13349
2Tamplen, M, Schwalje, A, Lustig, L, Alemi, AS, Miller, ME. Utility of preoperative computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in adult and pediatric cochlear implant candidates. Laryngoscope 2016;126:1440–5
3Trimble, K, Blaser, S, James, AL, Papsin, BC. Computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging before pediatric cochlear implantation? Developing an investigative strategy. Otol Neurotol 2007;28:317–24
4Sennaroglu, L, Saatci, I, Aralasmak, A, Gursel, B, Turan, E. Magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography in pre-operative evaluation of cochlear implant candidates with congenital hearing loss. J Laryngol Otol 2002;116:804–10
5Bamiou, DE, Worth, S, Phelps, P, Sirimanna, T, Rajput, K. Eighth nerve aplasia and hypoplasia in cochlear implant candidates: the clinical perspective. Otol Neurotol 2001;22:492–6
6Jackler, RK, Luxford, WM, House, WF. Congenital malformations of the inner ear: a classification based on embryogenesis. Laryngoscope 1987;97:214
7Buchman, CA, Copeland, BJ, Yu, KK, Brown, CJ, Carrasco, VN, Pillsbury, HC. Cochlear implantation in children with congenital inner ear malformations. Laryngoscope 2004;114:309–16
8Sennaroglu, L. Cochlear implantation in inner ear malformations--a review article. Cochlear Implants Int 2010;11:441
9Homerton University Hospital Radiology price list. In: http://www.homerton.nhs.uk/media/174141/1251-private-patient-tariff-for-2014-15.pdf [26 February 2018]
10Saunders, DE, Thompson, C, Gunny, R, Jones, R, Cox, T, Chong, WK. Magnetic resonance imaging protocols for paediatric neuroradiology. Pediatr Radiol 2007;37:789–97
11Jonas, NE, Ahmed, J, Grainger, J, Jephson, CG, Wyatt, ME, Hartley, BE et al. MRI brain abnormalities in cochlear implant candidates: how common and how important are they? Int J Pediatric Otorhinolaryngol 2012;76:927–9
12Bettman, RH, Van Olphen, F, Zonneveld, FW, Huizing, EH. Preoperative imaging protocol for cochlear implant candidates. Acta Otolaryngol 2004;124:1028–32
13Ellul, S, Shelton, C, Davidson, HC, Harnsberger, HR. Preoperative cochlear implant imaging: is magnetic resonance imaging enough? Am J Otol 2000;21:528–33
14Parry, DA, Booth, T, Roland, PS. Advantages of magnetic resonance imaging over computed tomography in preoperative evaluation of pediatric cochlear implant candidates. Otol Neurotol 2005;26:976–82
15Gleeson, TG, Lacy, PD, Bresnihan, M, Gaffney, R, Brennan, P, Viani, L. High resolution computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-operative assessment of cochlear implant patients. J Laryngol Otol 2003;117:692–5

Keywords

Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging in paediatric cochlear implant assessment: a pilot study and our experience at Great Ormond Street Hospital

  • H Kanona (a1), K Stephenson (a1), F D'Arco (a1), K Rajput (a1), L Cochrane (a1) and C Jephson (a1)...

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed