Inner ear MRI: is it always useful to manage intravenous contrast?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the added value of administering intravenous contrast (IVC) routinely to the MRI of patients with audiovestibular symptoms in the assessment of a neuroradiologist and a resident.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Retrospective study including patients who had an inner ear MRI for two months. Two radiologists reviewed independently and blinded the images. A first assessment was made analyzing just the sequences acquired without contrast and then a second evaluation of all the sequences, including post-contrast T1 sequences. The interobserver correlation and the correlation between MRI findings and the reason for requesting the study were calculated.

RESULTS

40 patients were included. The range age was 36-80 years. The most frequent reason for request the MRI was hearing loss (52.5%). Neuroradiologist without IVC found 82.5% of extraotic pathology and 17.5% of otic pathology, highlighting the neurinoma of the VIII pair (7.5%); ossifying labyrinthitis, retrofenestrated otosclerosis and cholesteatoma. After IVC administration, findings were similar. The resident identified otic pathology in 5% in baseline sequences and 20% using CIV. The interobserver correlation using IVC was excellent (0.97), but weak without IVC (0.52). There was a correlation between the reasons for request the MRI and the findings in the ears, both in protocols without IVC (p = 0.004) and in protocols with IVC (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Inner ear MRI without contrast gives relevant information to assess audiovestibular symptoms. The use of IVC increases the degree of confidence in a novel radiologist, while in the expert its use is less relevant. A protocol should be proposed in which gadolinium is used in selected patients.