• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

MRI, CT Beneficial for Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss

by George T. Hashisaki, MD • July 10, 2016

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

What is the utility of MRI imaging, compared with CT, in the evaluation of pediatric sensorineural hearing loss?

Background: In the evaluation of pediatric patients with sensorineural hearing loss, imaging of the temporal bone and inner ear may lead to diagnoses pertinent to the etiology of the hearing loss or to findings affecting medical decisions for that child. Questions arise as to the relative utility of MRI or CT imaging in this scenario.

You Might Also Like

  • MRI, CT Imaging Beneficial for Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Abnormal MRI in Asymmetric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Evaluating Abnormal MRI in Asymmetric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Is Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging More Useful in the Evaluation of Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss?
Explore This Issue
July 2016

Study design: Retrospective systematic review.

Synopsis: A systematic review of MEDLINE from 1996 through December 2013 was performed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria narrowed the results, yielding 29 studies (n=2,434 patients with MRI and n=1,451 patients with CT). The pooled data diagnostic yield for MRI was 26% for all imaging findings, combining otologic and brain findings.

The risks and benefits of the two modalities were compared. For the specific finding of enlarged vestibular aqueduct, CT had a higher yield than MRI. The risks associated with CT radiation have to be compared to MRI-associated risks of gadolinium administration, if used. In addition, MRI in the pediatric age group often requires sedation, with the attendant anesthesia risks.

Bottom line: MRI or CT imaging in the setting of pediatric sensorineural hearing loss can yield beneficial information. If there is a high suspicion of enlarged vestibular aqueduct, then CT appears to have a higher diagnostic yield. The choice between MRI and CT will have to be determined by individual clinicians, based on their assessments of relative risks and benefits.

Citation: Kachniarz B, Chen JX, Gilani S, Shin JJ. Diagnostic yield of MRI for pediatric hearing loss: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;152:5-22.

Filed Under: Literature Reviews, Otology/Neurotology, Otology/Neurotology, Pediatric, Pediatric, Practice Focus Tagged With: CT imaging, MRI, outcome, pediatrics, sensorineural hearing lossIssue: July 2016

You Might Also Like:

  • MRI, CT Imaging Beneficial for Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Abnormal MRI in Asymmetric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Evaluating Abnormal MRI in Asymmetric Sensorineural Hearing Loss
  • Is Computed Tomography or Magnetic Resonance Imaging More Useful in the Evaluation of Pediatric Sensorineural Hearing Loss?

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Do you use AI-powered scribes for documentation?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • How to: Positioning for Middle Cranial Fossa Repair of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • The Importance of Time Away
    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 
    • Reflections from a Past President of the Triological Society
    • ENT Surgeons Explore the Benefits and Challenges of AI-Powered Scribes: Revolutionizing Documentation in Healthcare
    • How To: Open Expansion Laryngoplasty for Combined Glottic and Subglottic Stenosis

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939