Poll: Did Your MRI Find Anything Clinically Significant? Or Did You Have a CT Scan Instead?

I know from reading older discussions on this website that Canon makes the quietest MRI machines on the market, so I was disappointed to learn that my hospital system uses one made by Siemens. It's a 3T machine with the model name of Vida. They said I'd be provided with earplugs but NOT earmuffs because my head would be inside a snug-fitting coil.

I then called Canon's corporate office to ask if they could tell me where to find the nearest Canon, and the lady on the phone said they are not allowed to release that information to the general public.

The other two major hospital systems in my region use General Electric. This means there aren't any Canons within easy driving distance of where I live.

I'm now going to talk to my physician assistant about the pros and cons of having a CT scan instead. But before I do, I'm curious to know how many of you had an MRI that actually saw something clinically significant inside your ears or brain, versus an MRI that found nothing remarkable. And if you chose not to get an MRI, I'd like to know if you had a CT scan and whether that was just as helpful in treating and diagnosing you.

I have bad noxacusis in the right ear and tinnitus in the left ear. It's not strictly unilateral tinnitus because it sometimes switches to the right ear and back again. I've had my symptoms for just under three months, and I've seen a tiny improvement just in the past week, so I'm hesitant to make it worse.

Thoughts?

 

MRI abnormalities - audiovestibular disorders:

An MRI will show pathologic condition - cochlea/labyrinth, about (1.0%) of the time. An MRI is not needed for this. It's a given with tinnitus.

About (5.0%) of the time, an MRI will show the internal auditory meatus/cerebellopontine angle, and pathologic lesions (3.0%) that involve the central audiovestibular tract at the brainstem. Again, this is a given with tinnitus.

About one-fourth of the time with tinnitus, an MRI will show microangiopathic changes of the brain. This consideration for focal hyperintensities of the brain using MRI - needs suspect for evidence of multiple sclerosis, sarcoidosis or temporal metastasis. If it's suspect that one may have one of these conditions - MS, sarcoidosis or temporal metastasis, then an MRI or CT is needed. These conditions rarely go hand in hand with tinnitus.

We all have some white matter - a sign of aging.

Pathologic conditions, such as parotid gland or petrous bone apex tumors, are unrelated to the audiovestibular symptoms.

MRI for brain injury, neck injury, facial, tumor, falling down - being off balance, dizziness and headaches. A CT can be often used.

MRI or CT for pulsatile tinnitus.

 

Excellent poll idea!

I was offered an MRI on the basis I have unilateral tinnitus but similar audiograms on each ear.

I declined. Since I am quite sure my tinnitus was caused by either earwax build up or COVID-19 - I thought it was highly unlikely to reveal anything of any significance.

The ENT man did say it was rare in any tinnitus cases to find anything at all from and MRI scan. But you need to make your own choice.

 

Wow, @Greg Sacramento, you sure have a lot of data! Thank you for all that detail. Do you work in healthcare, or are you just very experienced with this topic because of your personal experience?

@Stuart-T, it's good to know that your ENT guy said that. I don't want my ENT guy to look down on me or think I'm being a difficult patient when I broach the subject of postponing or declining the scan.

LOL, I'm still wondering why Canon treats their information like a classified military secret. Do they think that if they divulged the whereabouts of every Canon Vantage in the world, that something awful would happen?

I'm picturing a blockbuster film like "Ocean's 11," but instead of a classic jewel heist or a museum heist, it's all of us plotting to break into hospitals around the world, late at night, just so we can run ourselves through the Canon Vantage machines and escape without having to pay any copays or deductibles. If anybody can do this without getting caught, it's people like us. Because of our sensitive ears, we already move through the world as quietly as ninjas.

The only hard part? We'd have to bribe or blackmail some radiology techs to help us out, as I'm pretty sure that operating an MRI is a lot harder than operating a photocopier!

 

Agree.

 

MRIs are incredibly noisy. Often up to 110 dB and possibly above. It would seem like a real bad idea to have one. Doubt it would show anything anyway, and even if it, how would that help anything?

 

In my case, MRI didn't show any abnormalities. It did make my tinnitus significantly and permanently worse. Because of how loud they are, I did not get it for tinnitus. I only went for the MRI once I began having paresthesia in my hands and feet. Thankfully the paresthesia eventually stopped, the tinnitus however has stayed.

 

The main reason for an MRI is to check for an acoustic neuroma for people with unilateral tinnitus. This is a very rare cause of unilateral tinnitus but ENTs like to rule it out. CT scan is less likely to detect a small acoustic neuroma.

I had an MRI and it was very loud. My hyperacusis in left ear started the day after the MRI, so may have been the cause. I wouldn't have another one.

An MRI usually only takes about 10 minutes though. It gives some peace of mind to know there is no tumour.

May be worth asking ENT how likely a CT scan is of detecting an acoustic neuroma.

 

Let’s add - for those who had an MRI and a cause was found - in whose case did that result in a procedure that ultimately resolved the tinnitus vs. it was just an academic affair.