Impedance Testing on Cochlear Implants After Electroconvulsive Therapy

McRackan, Theodore R.; Rivas, Alejandro; Hedley-Williams, Andrea; Raj, Vidya; Dietrich, Mary S.; Clark, Nathaniel; Labadie, Robert F.

doi:10.1097/yct.0000000000000124

Cited by 8 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was no statistically significant difference in impedance values between ipsilateral and contralateral ECT. Further testing by the manufacturer did not show any electrical damage [4].…”

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…There are no absolute contraindications for ECT treatment, but in practice, a CI is considered one [4]. The literature on ECT and CI safety is limited to a study on cadaver heads and two case reports.…”

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A 17-year-old male CI-user (Nucleus 22) received two en-bloc contralateral ECT treatments (48mC, 800mA, 9.9J, 1ms pulse width, 40Hz, 0.75s) on vital indication due to manic delirium; later subjective and objective assessment of the CI showed no dysfunction [5]. The CI was replaced four months later due to pain at the site of the external processor, and examination of the CI revealed it was not a fault related to the ECT [4].…”

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of CI-users is increasing [1], and so is the number of CI-users that may need psychiatric treatment with ECT or TMS. However, ECT and TMS are not advised by CI manufacturers and contraindicated in ECT and TMS guidelines [2,4]. Thus, CI-patients are prevented from an effective and, in some cases, life-saving treatment [5,6].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cochlear implant should not be absolute contraindication for electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cis and Ectmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cochlear implant should not be absolute contraindication for electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A prior cadaveric study demonstrated preserved impedances after 12 sessions of ECT were delivered to five contralaterally placed CIs and five ipsilaterally placed CIs 2 . The effects of ECT on living patients with CIs have been previously discussed in a letter to the editor 3 and two case reports 4,5 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Preserved Cochlear Implant Function After Multiple Electroconvulsive Therapy Treatments

Jiam

Kramer

et al. 2020

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This case report presents the successful use of multiple treatments of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in a patient with a cochlear implant (CI). A 60‐year‐old man with a left‐sided CI and bipolar disorder presented with severe depression. A total of 9 separate sessions of unilateral ECT was administered to the contralateral side of the existing CI. We collected subjective, clinical, and audiological assessment of the patient and the CI prior, during, and after ECT therapy. The patient tolerated ECT well and there were no complications. Unilateral ECT was performed contralateral to the CI without any harm to the patient or implant. Laryngoscope, 131:E1695–E1698, 2021

show abstract

Should Cochlear Implant Contraindicate Transcranial Stimulation? A Case Study with Safety Implications

Zarchi,

Amitai,

Attias

et al. 2024

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrical stimulation in proximity to a cochlear implant (CI) is contraindicated due to the potential risk of damaging the implant and thermal insult to the inner ear. Yet, during surgical procedures that pose a risk to the nervous system, the use of transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring is crucial for assessing the integrity of the motor pathways and preventing neurological insults. The current paper depicts a case of a patient with CI undergoing two consecutive surgeries for scoliosis correction, revealing a suspected pending neurological insult in the second operation. An audiological and electrical examination after each operation demonstrated preserved auditory function and normal functioning of the CI, respectively. The current case is consistent with previous reports reviewed in the paper, showing no CI failures nor hearing deterioration following transcranial electrical stimulation for neuromonitoring and electroconvulsive therapy. In light of this accumulating evidence, there is an urgent need for manufacturers and regulatory bodies to proactively undertake a comprehensive review of this declared contraindication. Subsequently, an updated data‐driven risk analysis is essential to weigh the consequences of preventing the contraindicated tools and treatments, as well as their potential benefits to these patients. Laryngoscope, 2024

show abstract

Impedance Testing on Cochlear Implants After Electroconvulsive Therapy

Abstract: Electroconvulsive therapy does not seem to cause any detectable electrical injury to CIs.

Cited by 8 publications

References 7 publications

Cochlear implant should not be absolute contraindication for electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation

Cochlear implant should not be absolute contraindication for electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation

Preserved Cochlear Implant Function After Multiple Electroconvulsive Therapy Treatments

Should Cochlear Implant Contraindicate Transcranial Stimulation? A Case Study with Safety Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About