oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Metal Artifacts in CT Imaging of Hip Prostheses: Evaluation of Metal Artifact Reduction Techniques Provided by Four Vendors
Örebro University, School of Medical Sciences.
Örebro University, School of Medical Sciences. Örebro University Hospital.
Örebro University, School of Medical Sciences. Örebro University Hospital.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8351-3367
2015 (English)Conference paper, Poster (with or without abstract) (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques, provided by four vendors, in CT imaging of hip prostheses.

METHOD AND MATERIALS: A water phantom containing hip prostheses mounted in calf bones was scanned with four CT scanners; Philips Ingenuity; Toshiba Aquilion ONE Vision edition; GE Discovery 750 HD and Siemens SOMATOM Definition Flash. An uncorrected (reference) image was obtained for every CT and compared with images acquired with the scanner specific MAR technique; either monoenergetic reconstruction of Dual Energy CT (DECT) data (GE and Siemens) or the use of a MAR algorithm software (Philips and Toshiba), or a combination of the two (GE). The MAR techniques were applied for varying tube voltage, kernel and reconstruction technique. The reference images were quantitatively compared to the MAR images by analyzing the noise and the CT number accuracy in region of interests (ROIs). Visual grading was performed by five radiologists based on ten image quality (IQ) criteria.

RESULTS: The MAR algorithms implied a general noise reduction (by up to 77%) and improved IQ based on the majority of the visual grading criteria. The use of monoenergetic reconstructions of DECT data, without any MAR algorithm, did not decrease the noise in the ROIs to the same extent as the MAR algorithms (up to 41%) and did even increase the noise in one ROI. The visual grading evaluation showed that monoenergetic reconstructions in general degraded the IQ for one of the DECT scanners and improved the IQ for only a few of the criteria for the other DECT scanner.

CONCLUSION: The quantitative analysis and the visual grading evaluation showed that the IQ was generally improved when the MAR algorithms were used. However, additional artifacts and degradation of the IQ were noted in some MAR image regions. The use of monoenergetic reconstruction was concluded to not reduce metal artifacts to the same extent as the MAR algorithms and to even degrade the IQ in several image regions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE/APPLICATION: This study points out advantages and potential risks of using MAR techniques in CT imaging of hip prostheses and will be useful for clinics when optimizing CT scan protocols and purchasing new CT systems.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015.
National Category
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-63495OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-63495DiVA, id: diva2:1168277
Conference
Radiological Society of North America (RSNA 2015), Chicago, USA, November 29 - December 4, 2015
Available from: 2017-12-20 Created: 2017-12-20 Last updated: 2017-12-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records BETA

Andersson, Karin M.Norrman, EvaThunberg, Per

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Andersson, Karin M.Norrman, EvaThunberg, Per
By organisation
School of Medical SciencesÖrebro University Hospital
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 36 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf