Visual grading evaluation of commercially available metal artefact reduction techniques in hip prosthesis computed tomography

Andersson, Karin; Norrman, Eva; Geijer, Håkan; Krauß, W.; Cao, Yang; Jendeberg, Johan; Geijer, Mats; Lidén, Mats; Thunberg, Per

doi:10.1259/bjr.20150993

Cited by 30 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Clinical features of projection-based MAR algorithms include (a) there is no need to increase radiation dose; (b) MAR algorithms can be applied retrospectively, and radiologists can decide whether to apply the algorithm after viewing the scanned images; and (c) although MAR algorithms reduce the original streak artifacts, the algorithms may introduce new artifacts into the images (19,(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35). Details of newly developed artifacts with the use of projection-based MAR algorithms are discussed later in the "Interpretation Pitfalls" section.…”

Section: Approaches To the Correction Of Metal Artifacts Approaches Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Artifacts that are due to metallic hardware are also caused by photon starvation, among other effects, and such artifacts become more pronounced with larger amounts of metal and with metals with higher atomic numbers. Bright and dark band artifacts caused by photon starvation from large amounts of metal and from metals with high atomic numbers are so strong that the dual-energy CT technique alone does not sufficiently remove the artifacts (31,62,63). On the other hand, the projection-based MAR algorithm detects and segments the metal part from the original image by using a Houns field unit threshold and compensates the image with a designated algorithm for photon starvation caused by metal.…”

Section: Types Of Metallic Hardwarementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Disappearance of metallic implants and underestimation of implant size have also been reported (28)(29)(30)(31). According to Wang et al (28), these problems may occur because the algorithm mistook part of the metal as an artifact and removed it during calculation, which seems to happen with thin and spiral-linear objects such as acetabular cups.…”

Section: Interpretation Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artifacts caused by metallic implants appear as dark and bright streaks at computed tomography (CT), which severely degrade the image quality and decrease the diagnostic value of the examination. When x-rays pass through a metal object, depending on its size and composition, different physical effects negatively affect the measurements in the detector, most notably the effects of photon starvation and beam hardening. To improve image quality and recover information about underlying structures, several artifact reduction methods have been introduced in modern CT systems. Projection-based metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms act in projection space and replace corrupted projections caused by metal with interpolation from neighboring uncorrupted projections. MAR algorithms primarily suppress artifacts that are due to photon starvation. The dual-energy CT technique is characterized by data acquisition at two different energy spectra. Dual-energy CT provides synthesized virtual monochromatic images at different photon energy (kiloelectron volt) levels, and virtual monochromatic images obtained at high kiloelectron volt levels are known to reduce the effects of beam hardening. In clinical practice, although MAR algorithms can be applied after image acquisition, the decision whether to apply dual-energy CT for the patient usually needs to be made before image acquisition. Radiologists should be more familiar with the clinical and technical features of each method and should be able to choose the optimal method according to the clinical situation. RSNA, 2018.

show abstract

Section: Approaches To the Correction Of Metal Artifacts Approaches Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Types Of Metallic Hardwarementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Interpretation Pitfallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The combination of MAR software and virtual monochromatic DECT imaging was advocated in some cases because it may reduce metal-related artifacts more effectively than one technique alone. [60][61][62] Limitations to combined use include affecting the appearance of metal implants, over-or underestimating the size of the implant, and maybe even introducing secondary artifacts. 61,63,64 Depending on the implant composition, size, and shape, no beneficial effects may arise from combining both virtual monochromatic DECT imaging and iterative MAR.…”

Section: Combined Mar Software and Virtual Monochromatic Dectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metal About the Hip and Artifact Reduction Techniques: From Basic Concepts to Advanced Imaging

Khodarahmi

Isaac

Fishman³

et al. 2019

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promising outcomes of hip replacement interventions in this era of aging populations have led to higher demands for hip arthroplasty procedures. These require effective methods and techniques for the detection of postoperative outcomes and complications. Based on the presence or absence of radiographic findings, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) may be required to detect and further characterize different causes of failing implants. Yet metal-related artifacts degrade image quality and pose significant challenges for adequate image quality. To mitigate such artifacts in MRI, a set of techniques, collectively known as metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI, were developed that optimize the framework of the conventional pulse sequences and exploit novel multispectral and multispatial imaging methods such as Slice Encoding for Metal Artifact Correction (SEMAC) and Multi-Acquisition Variable-Resonance Image Combination (MAVRIC). Metal-induced artifacts on CT can be effectively reduced with virtual monochromatic reconstruction of dual-energy CT data sets, metal artifact reduction reconstruction algorithms, and postprocessing image visualization techniques.

show abstract

“…Huang et al evaluated CT number accuracy, metal size accuracy, and streak artifact severity reduction by using several phantoms with OMAR and DECT GSI-based monochromatic CT (with and without MARS) [20]; the three artifact mitigation methods obtained favorable but all different results for patients with metal implants. Andersson et al performed VGA for images altered using the four MAR techniques, and OMAR was discovered to obtain the highest quality result [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative assessment of three vendor’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging using a customized phantom

Chou

Ying

et al. 2019

Computer Assisted Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A metal implant was placed in an acrylic phantom to enable quantitative analysis of the metal artifact reduction techniques used in computed tomography (CT) scanners from three manufacturers. Two titanium rods were placed in a groove in a cylindrical phantom made by acrylic, after which the groove was filled with water. The phantom was scanned using three CT scanners (Toshiba, GE, Siemens) under the abdomen CT setting. CT number accuracy, contrast-tonoise ratio, area of the metal rods in the images, and fraction of affected pixel area of water were measured using ImageJ. Different iterative reconstruction, dual energy, and metal artifact reduction techniques were compared within three vendors. The highest contrast-to-noise ratio of three scanners were 85.7 ± 8.4 (Toshiba), 85.9 ± 11.7 (GE), and 55.0 ± 14.8 (Siemens); and the most correct results of metal area were 157.1 ± 1.4 mm 2 (Toshiba), 155.0 ± 1.0 (GE), and 170.6 ± 5.3 (Siemens). The fraction of affected pixel area obtained using single-energy metal artifact reduction of Toshiba scanner was 2.2% ± 0.7%, which is more favorable than 4.1% ± 0.7% obtained using metal artifact reduction software of GE scanner (p ¼ 0.002). Among all quantitative results, the estimations with fraction of affected pixel areas matched the effect of metal artifact reduction in the actual images. Therefore, the single-energy metal artifact reduction technique of Toshiba scanner had a desirable effect. The metal artifact reduction software of GE scanner effectively reduced the effect of metal artifacts; however, it underestimated the size of the metal rods. The monoenergetic and dual energy composition techniques of Siemens scanner could not effectively reduce metal artifacts.

show abstract

Visual grading evaluation of commercially available metal artefact reduction techniques in hip prosthesis computed tomography

Abstract: Qualitative evaluation of the usefulness of several MAR techniques from different vendors in CT imaging of hip prosthesis.

Cited by 30 publications

References 25 publications

Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists

Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists

Metal About the Hip and Artifact Reduction Techniques: From Basic Concepts to Advanced Imaging

Quantitative assessment of three vendor’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging using a customized phantom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About