Single-Energy Retrospective Metal Artifact Reduction Using Adaptive Thresholding for Metal Implants in the Abdomen and Pelvis.
Journal
Journal of computer assisted tomography
ISSN: 1532-3145
Titre abrégé: J Comput Assist Tomogr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7703942
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
pubmed:
29
3
2020
medline:
26
5
2020
entrez:
29
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess impact of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm utilizing retrospective adaptive thresholding in reducing metal artifacts in the abdomen and pelvis. In this prospective institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study, 90 patients with various metals (n = 97) on computed tomography of abdomen and pelvis (Canon Medical, Aquilion ONE and PRIME) scanned 07/2017-09/2018 with SEMAR retrospectively applied were included. Density was measured in the near and far field to the metals. Density standard deviation (SD), representing artifact severity, was compared with and without SEMAR applied. Two trained human observers independently evaluated severity of artifacts on a five-point scale (0, no artifact; 5, severe artifact). The SEMAR significantly decreased artifact severity in the near field of high-density metal implants (SD of 204 ± 101HU without vs. 66 ± 40HU with SEMAR, P < 0.001). In the far field, the artifact severity was similar (40 ± 31HU without vs. 36 ± 27HU with SEMAR, P = 0.41). Artifact severity was decreased adjacent to low-density metal in the near field (SD of 86 ± 56HU without vs 49 ± 30HU with SEMAR, P < 0.001). In the far field to the low-density metals artifact severity was similar (33 ± 29HU without vs. 31 ± 27HU with SEMAR, P = 0.79). Subjectively, artifacts severity decreased for high-density metals in near field by 1.3 ± 1.0, and in far field by 0.7 ± 0.7 and for low-density metals in the near field by 0.7 ± 1.0, far field 0.4 ± 0.5, all P < 0.05. The SEMAR retrospective algorithm with adaptive thresholding subjectively and objectively reduced near-field artifacts generated by high- and low-density metals.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32217899
doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000001013
pii: 00004728-202005000-00020
doi:
Substances chimiques
Metals
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
443-449Références
Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics. 2004;24:1679–1691.
Kalender WA, Hebel R, Ebersberger J. Reduction of CT artifacts caused by metallic implants. Radiology. 1987;164:576–577.
Xia D, Roeske JC, Yu L, et al. A hybrid approach to reducing computed tomography metal artifacts in intracavitary brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2005;4:18–23.
Rinkel J, Dillon WP, Funk T, et al. Computed tomographic metal artifact reduction for the detection and quantitation of small features near large metallic implants: a comparison of published methods. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2008;32:621–629.
Wagenaar D, van der Graaf ER, van der Schaaf A, et al. Quantitative comparison of commercial and non-commercial metal artifact reduction techniques in computed tomography. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0127932.
Huang JY, Kerns JR, Nute JL, et al. An evaluation of three commercially available metal artifact reduction methods for CT imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60:1047–1067.
Katsura M, Sato J, Akahane M, et al. Current and novel techniques for metal artifact reduction at CT: practical guide for radiologists. Radiographics. 2018;38:450–461.
Ragusi MAAD, van der Meer RW, Joemai RMS, et al. Evaluation of CT angiography image quality acquired with single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm in patients after complex endovascular aortic repair. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2018;41:323–329.
Fang J, Zhang D, Wilcox C, et al. Metal implants on CT: comparison of iterative reconstruction algorithms for reduction of metal artifacts with single energy and spectral CT scanning in a phantom model. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2017;42:742–748.
Kidoh M, Utsunomiya D, Ikeda O, et al. Reduction of metallic coil artefacts in computed tomography body imaging: effects of a new single-energy metal artefact reduction algorithm. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:1378–1386.
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174.
Brook OR, Gourtsoyianni S, Brook A, et al. Spectral CT with metal artifacts reduction software for improvement of tumor visibility in the vicinity of gold fiducial markers. Radiology. 2012;263:696–705.
Bolstad K, Flatabø S, Aadnevik D, et al. Metal artifact reduction in CT, a phantom study: subjective and objective evaluation of four commercial metal artifact reduction algorithms when used on three different orthopedic metal implants. Acta Radiol. 2018;59:1110–1118.
Gomez-Cardona D, Hayes JW, Zhang R, et al. Low-dose cone-beam CT via raw counts domain low-signal correction schemes: performance assessment and task-based parameter optimization (part II. Task-based parameter optimization). Med Phys. 2018;45:1957–1969.
Gondim Teixeira PA, Meyer JB, Baumann C, et al. Total hip prosthesis CT with single-energy projection-based metallic artifact reduction: impact on the visualization of specific periprosthetic soft tissue structures. Skeletal Radiol. 2014;43:1237–1246.
Sonoda A, Nitta N, Ushio N, et al. Evaluation of the quality of CT images acquired with the single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm in patients with hip and dental prostheses and aneurysm embolization coils. Jpn J Radiol. 2015;33:710–716.
Funama Y, Taguchi K, Utsunomiya D, et al. A newly-developed metal artifact reduction algorithm improves the visibility of oral cavity lesions on 320-MDCT volume scans. Phys Med. 2015;31:66–71.
Wang G, Snyder DL, O'Sullivan JA, et al. Iterative deblurring for CT metal artifact reduction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1996;15:657–664.
Meyer E, Raupach R, Lell M, et al. Normalized metal artifact reduction (NMAR) in computed tomography. Med Phys. 2010;37:5482–5493.
Park HS, Choi JK, Park KR, et al. Metal artifact reduction in CT by identifying missing data hidden in metals. J Xray Sci Technol. 2013;21:357–372.
Gjesteby L, Man BD, Jin Y, et al. Metal artifact reduction in CT: where are we after four decades? IEEE Access. 2016;4:5826–5849.
Morsbach F, Bickelhaupt S, Wanner GA, et al. Reduction of metal artifacts from hip prostheses on CT images of the pelvis: value of iterative reconstructions. Radiology. 2013;268:237–244.
Boas FE, Fleischmann D. Evaluation of two iterative techniques for reducing metal artifacts in computed tomography. Radiology. 2011;259:894–902.
Watzke O, Kalender WA. A pragmatic approach to metal artifact reduction in CT: merging of metal artifact reduced images. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:849–856.