Phantom based qualitative and quantitative evaluation of artifacts in MR images of metallic hip prostheses

Månsson, Sven; Müller, Gunilla; Wellman, Fredrik; Nittka, Mathias; Lundin, Björn

doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2014.12.001

Cited by 17 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…9,22 Our results showed that SEMAC and VAT effectively reduced the area of signal void and length of spinal canal obscuration around the instrumentation, which is consistent with previous studies in vivo and in vitro. 13,17,23,24 Also, the visualizations of all periprosthetic anatomic structures were significantly better for SEMAC-VAT TSE images compared with standard TSE images with a significantly improved periprosthetic visualization of the pedicle, vertebral body, dural sac, and neural foramina.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

SEMAC-VAT MR Imaging Unravels Peri-instrumentation Lesions in Patients With Attendant Symptoms After Spinal Surgery

et al. 2016

Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed for evaluating the diagnostic value of a 2D Turbo Spin Echo (TSE) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging sequence implanted slice-encoding metal artifact correction (SEMAC) and view-angle tilting (VAT) in patients with spinal instrumentation.Sixty-seven consecutive patients with an average age of 59.7 ± 17.8 years old (range: 32–75 years) were enrolled in this study. Both sagittal, axial T1-weighted and T2-weighted MRI images were acquired with a standard TSE sequence and a high-bandwidth TSE sequence implemented the SEMAC and VAT techniques. Three continuous sections around the instrumentation in axial and sagittal images were selected for quantitative evaluation. The measurement included cumulative areas of signal void on axial images and the length of spinal canal obscuration on sagittal images. Three radiologists independently evaluated all images blindly. The inter-observer reliability was evaluated with inter-class coefficient. We defined patients with discomfortable symptoms caused by spinal instrumentation as spinal instrumentation adverse reaction.Visualizations of all periprosthetic anatomic structures were significantly better for SEMAC-VAT compared with standard imaging. For axial images, the area of signal void at the level of the instrumentation were statistically reduced with SEMAC-VAT TSE sequences than with standard TSE sequences for T2-weighted images (9.9 ± 2.6 cm2 vs 29.8 ± 14.7 cm2, P < 0.001). For sagittal imaging, the length of spinal canal obscuration at the level of the instrumentation was reduced from 5.2 ± 2.0 cm to 1.2 ± 0.6 cm on T2-weighted images (P < 0.001), and from 4.8 ± 2.1 cm to 1.1 ± 0.5 cm on T1-weighted images with SEMAC-VAT sequences (P < 0.001). Interobserver agreement for visualization of anatomic structures and image quality was good for both SEMAC-VAT (k = 0.77 and 0.68, respectively) and standard (k = 0.74 and 0.80, respectively) imaging. The number of abnormal findings noted on SEMAC images (59 findings) was significantly higher than detected on standard images (40 findings). The incidence rate of spinal instrumentation adverse reaction was 38.81%.MR images with SEMAC-VAT can significantly reduce metal artifacts for spinal instrumentation and improve delineation of the instrumentation and periprosthetic region. Furthermore, SEMAC-VAT technique can improve diagnostic accuracy in patients with post-instrumentation spinal diseases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

SEMAC-VAT MR Imaging Unravels Peri-instrumentation Lesions in Patients With Attendant Symptoms After Spinal Surgery

et al. 2016

Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These implants can in principle already be visualized with optimized high bandwidth TSE protocols and it is sufficient to use 5 SES. Although no external volume reference such as X-ray [13] was used at this point, a comparison with a protocol using a very high SES number gave a clear evaluation of the protocol efficien- cy. At present, only in vitro experiments were performed and our results need to be validated in vivo.…”

Section: Semac: Stir Imagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the implant material is usually unknown, the imaging protocols are not optimized based on the material and clinical studies do not differentiate results based on prostheses models. Recently, there has been an increased interest in studying the influence of implant material on the performance of an artifact reduction sequence [13,14,16,17]. Månson et al presented a method for evaluating the performance of different techniques using SEMAC, VAT and T 1-w TSE sequences with different prostheses.…”

Section: Semac: Stir Imagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1). The range of SES was defined based on the results presented by Månson et al [13]. For every implant an SES was selected as the minimum number and an optimal number of SES was defined from the analysis.…”

Section: Mr Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, several studies have recently taken into account the influence of the implant material on the efficiency of different artifact suppression methods: a) SE, GRE and high bandwidth TSE [14,17], b) MAVRIC [16] and c) SEMAC [13,14]. Månson et al highlighted that a proper number of SES is critical for the performance of SEMAC and also that the material of a prosthesis is a decisive parameter affecting the performance of an artifact reduction technique [13]. However, how the efficiency of the sequence changes for a continuous range of SES and whether it changes for different types of image contrast (T 1-w versus fat suppression) are not investigated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Optimization of Scan Time in MRI for Total Hip Prostheses: SEMAC Tailoring for Prosthetic Implants Containing Different Types of Metals

Deligianni

Bieri

Elke³

et al. 2015

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of soft tissues after total hip arthroplasty is of clinical interest for the diagnosis of various pathologies that are usually invisible with other imaging modalities. As a result, considerable effort has been put into the development of metal artifact reduction MRI strategies, such as slice encoding for metal artifact correction (SEMAC). Generally, the degree of metal artifact reduction with SEMAC directly relates to the overall time spent for acquisition, but there is no specific consensus about the most efficient sequence setup depending on the implant material. The aim of this article is to suggest material-tailored SEMAC protocol settings. Materials and Methods: Five of the most common total hip prostheses (1. Revision prosthesis (S-Rom), 2. Titanium alloy, 3. M?ller type (CoNiCRMo alloy), 4. Old Charnley prosthesis (Exeter/Stryker), 5. MS-30 stem (stainless-steel)) were scanned on a 1.5?T MRI clinical scanner with a SEMAC sequence with a range of artifact-resolving slice encoding steps (SES: 2???23) along the slice direction (yielding a total variable scan time ranging from 1 to 10?min). The reduction of the artifact volume in comparison with maximal artifact suppression was evaluated both quantitatively and qualitatively in order to establish a recommended number of steps for each case. Results: The number of SES that reduced the artifact volume below approximately 300?mm3 ranged from 3 to 13, depending on the material. Our results showed that although 3 SES steps can be sufficient for artifact reduction for titanium prostheses, at least 11 SES should be used for prostheses made of materials such as certain alloys of stainless steel. Conclusion: Tailoring SES to the implant material and to the desired degree of metal artifact reduction represents a simple tool for workflow optimization of SEMAC imaging near total hip arthroplasty in a clinical setting. Key Points: ??Five of the most common total hip prostheses have been investigated in vitro. ??Tailored SEMAC protocols ? in terms of scan duration ? have been determined. ??Tailoring was similar for T1-weighted and inversion recovery SEMAC MRI. ??The suggested prosthesis-related SEMAC adaptation shortens clinical scan times. Citation Format: ??Deligianni X, Bieri O, Elke R et?al. Optimization of Scan Time in MRI for Total Hip Prostheses: SEMAC Tailoring for Prosthetic Implants Containing Different Types of Metals. Fortschr R?ntgenstr 2015; 187: 1116???1122

show abstract

Advances in MRI around metal

Jungmann

Agten

Pfirrmann

et al. 2017

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

161

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Phantom based qualitative and quantitative evaluation of artifacts in MR images of metallic hip prostheses

Cited by 17 publications

References 15 publications

SEMAC-VAT MR Imaging Unravels Peri-instrumentation Lesions in Patients With Attendant Symptoms After Spinal Surgery

SEMAC-VAT MR Imaging Unravels Peri-instrumentation Lesions in Patients With Attendant Symptoms After Spinal Surgery

Optimization of Scan Time in MRI for Total Hip Prostheses: SEMAC Tailoring for Prosthetic Implants Containing Different Types of Metals

Advances in MRI around metal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About