Literature DB >> 22923720

Reduction of metal artifacts in patients with total hip arthroplasty with slice-encoding metal artifact correction and view-angle tilting MR imaging.

Reto Sutter1, Erika J Ulbrich, Vladimir Jellus, Mathias Nittka, Christian W A Pfirrmann.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the new "warp" sequence (slice-encoding metal artifact correction [SEMAC], view-angle tilting [VAT], and increased bandwidth) for the reduction of both through-plane and in-plane magnetic resonance (MR) artifacts with current optimized MR sequences in patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board issued a waiver for this study. Forty patients with THA were prospectively included. SEMAC, VAT, and increased bandwidth were applied by using the warp turbo-spin-echo sequence at 1.5 T. Coronal short tau inversion-recovery (STIR)-warp and transverse T1-weighted warp (hereafter, T1-warp) images, as well as standard coronal STIR and transverse T1-weighted sequence images optimized with high bandwidth (STIR-hiBW and T1-hiBW), were acquired. Fifteen additional patients were examined to compare the T1-warp and T1-hiBW sequence with an identical matrix size. Signal void was quantified. Qualitative criteria (distinction of anatomic structures, blurring, and noise) were assessed on a five-point scale (1, no artifacts; 5, not visible due to severe artifacts) by two readers. Abnormal imaging findings were recorded. Quantitative data were analyzed with a t test and qualitative data with a Wilcoxon signed rank test.
RESULTS: Signal void around the acetabular component was smaller for STIR-warp than STIR-hiBW images (21.6 cm2 vs 42.4 cm2; P=.0001), and for T1-warp than T1-hiBW images (17.6 cm2 vs 20.2 cm2; P=.0001). Anatomic distinction was better on STIR-warp compared with STIR-hiBW images (1.9-2.8 vs 3.6-4.6; P=.0001), and on T1-warp compared with T1-hiBW images (1.3-2.8 vs 1.8-3.2; P<.002). Distortion, blurring, and noise were lower with warp sequences than with the standard sequences (P=.0001). Almost half of the abnormal imaging findings were missed on STIR-hiBW compared with STIR-warp images (55 vs 105 findings; P=.0001), while T1-hiBW was similar to T1-warp imaging (50 vs 55 findings; P=.06).
CONCLUSION: STIR-warp and T1-warp sequences were significantly better according to quantitative and qualitative image criteria, but a clinically relevant artifact reduction was only present for STIR images. © RSNA, 2012.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22923720     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112408

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  47 in total

Review 1.  An illustrative review to understand and manage metal-induced artifacts in musculoskeletal MRI: a primer and updates.

Authors:  J P Dillenseger; S Molière; P Choquet; C Goetz; M Ehlinger; G Bierry
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2016-02-02       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  [Postoperative spine].

Authors:  R Schlaeger; J M Lieb; K Shariat; F J Ahlhelm
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  Usefulness of metal artifact reduction with WARP technique at 1.5 and 3T MRI in imaging metal-on-metal hip resurfacings.

Authors:  Andrea Lazik; Stefan Landgraeber; Patrick Schulte; Oliver Kraff; Thomas C Lauenstein; Jens M Theysohn
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  PETRA, MSVAT-SPACE and SEMAC sequences for metal artefact reduction in dental MR imaging.

Authors:  Tim Hilgenfeld; Marcel Prager; Alexander Heil; Franz Sebastian Schwindling; Mathias Nittka; David Grodzki; Peter Rammelsberg; Martin Bendszus; Sabine Heiland
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  MR Imaging of Knee Arthroplasty Implants.

Authors:  Jan Fritz; Brett Lurie; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 5.333

6.  Advanced metal artifact reduction MRI of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty implants: compressed sensing acceleration enables the time-neutral use of SEMAC.

Authors:  Jan Fritz; Benjamin Fritz; Gaurav K Thawait; Esther Raithel; Wesley D Gilson; Mathias Nittka; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2016-08-06       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  MR imaging of soft tissue alterations after total hip arthroplasty: comparison of classic surgical approaches.

Authors:  Christoph A Agten; Reto Sutter; Claudio Dora; Christian W A Pfirrmann
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Metal artifact reduction MRI of total ankle arthroplasty implants.

Authors:  Cesar de Cesar Netto; Lucas F Fonseca; Benjamin Fritz; Steven E Stern; Esther Raithel; Mathias Nittka; Lew C Schon; Jan Fritz
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Hexagonal undersampling for faster MRI near metallic implants.

Authors:  Bragi Sveinsson; Pauline W Worters; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 4.668

10.  Sparse-SEMAC: rapid and improved SEMAC metal implant imaging using SPARSE-SENSE acceleration.

Authors:  Ricardo Otazo; Mathias Nittka; Mary Bruno; Esther Raithel; Christian Geppert; Soterios Gyftopoulos; Michael Recht; Leon Rybak
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.668

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.