OBJECTIVES: Artefacts from total hip replacement affect image quality and the visualisation of pelvic lesions on computed tomography (CT). We propose a frequency split (FS) approach in addition to the normalised metal artefact reduction (NMAR) algorithm that aims to suppress artefacts and improves image quality in patients with orthopaedic hardware. METHODS: Data from ten consecutive patients with metal artefacts from uni- (n = 5) and bilateral (n = 4) total hip replacement or osteosynthesis (n = 1) were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP), linear interpolation MAR (LIMAR), NMAR, FSLIMAR and FSNMAR and analysed for image quality and severity of artefacts. RESULTS: NMAR and FSNMAR significantly improved the assessment of the pelvic organs, lymph nodes and vessels compared with FBP, LIMAR or FSLIMAR (P < 0.05). Assessment of the metal hardware, joint and capsule was improved with the addition of FS (FSLIMAR, FSNMAR). No algorithm-related artefacts were detected in regions that did not contain metal. CONCLUSIONS: NMAR, FSLIMAR and FSNMAR have the potential to improve image quality in patients with artefacts from metal hardware and to improve the diagnostic accuracy of CT of the organs of the pelvis. Although introducing some algorithm-related artefacts, FSNMAR most accurately displayed adjacent bone and tissue next to metal implants. KEY POINTS: • Orthopaedic metallic hardware often creates serious artefacts in computed tomography, hindering diagnosis. • The normalised metal artefact reduction (NMAR) algorithm was developed to suppress such artefacts. • NMAR improves CT assessment of pelvic organs in patients with orthopaedic hardware. • Addition of the frequency split technique (FSNMAR) helps assess tissue near metal hardware. • NMAR and FSNMAR are robust and computationally effective sinogram interpolation algorithms.
OBJECTIVES: Artefacts from total hip replacement affect image quality and the visualisation of pelvic lesions on computed tomography (CT). We propose a frequency split (FS) approach in addition to the normalised metalartefact reduction (NMAR) algorithm that aims to suppress artefacts and improves image quality in patients with orthopaedic hardware. METHODS: Data from ten consecutive patients with metal artefacts from uni- (n = 5) and bilateral (n = 4) total hip replacement or osteosynthesis (n = 1) were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP), linear interpolation MAR (LIMAR), NMAR, FSLIMAR and FSNMAR and analysed for image quality and severity of artefacts. RESULTS: NMAR and FSNMAR significantly improved the assessment of the pelvic organs, lymph nodes and vessels compared with FBP, LIMAR or FSLIMAR (P < 0.05). Assessment of the metal hardware, joint and capsule was improved with the addition of FS (FSLIMAR, FSNMAR). No algorithm-related artefacts were detected in regions that did not contain metal. CONCLUSIONS: NMAR, FSLIMAR and FSNMAR have the potential to improve image quality in patients with artefacts from metal hardware and to improve the diagnostic accuracy of CT of the organs of the pelvis. Although introducing some algorithm-related artefacts, FSNMAR most accurately displayed adjacent bone and tissue next to metal implants. KEY POINTS: • Orthopaedic metallic hardware often creates serious artefacts in computed tomography, hindering diagnosis. • The normalised metalartefact reduction (NMAR) algorithm was developed to suppress such artefacts. • NMAR improves CT assessment of pelvic organs in patients with orthopaedic hardware. • Addition of the frequency split technique (FSNMAR) helps assess tissue near metal hardware. • NMAR and FSNMAR are robust and computationally effective sinogram interpolation algorithms.
Authors: Fabian Bamberg; Alexander Dierks; Konstantin Nikolaou; Maximilian F Reiser; Christoph R Becker; Thorsten R C Johnson Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Changsheng Zhou; Yan E Zhao; Song Luo; Hongyuan Shi; Lin Li; Ling Zheng; Long Jiang Zhang; Guangming Lu Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Lifeng Yu; Hua Li; Jan Mueller; James M Kofler; Xin Liu; Andrew N Primak; Joel G Fletcher; Luis S Guimaraes; Thanila Macedo; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Martijn F Boomsma; Mireille A Edens; Christiaan P Van Lingen; Niek Warringa; Harmen B Ettema; Cees C P M Verheyen; Mario Maas Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Joel Aissa; Johannes Boos; Lino Morris Sawicki; Niklas Heinzler; Karl Krzymyk; Martin Sedlmair; Patric Kröpil; Gerald Antoch; Christoph Thomas Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: A L Kotsenas; G J Michalak; D R DeLone; F E Diehn; K Grant; A F Halaweish; A Krauss; R Raupach; B Schmidt; C H McCollough; J G Fletcher Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Felix E Diehn; Gregory J Michalak; David R DeLone; Amy L Kotsenas; E Paul Lindell; Norbert G Campeau; Ahmed F Halaweish; Cynthia H McCollough; Joel G Fletcher Journal: Acta Radiol Open Date: 2017-11-26
Authors: David Gergely Kovacs; Laura A Rechner; Ane L Appelt; Anne K Berthelsen; Junia C Costa; Jeppe Friborg; Gitte F Persson; Jens Peter Bangsgaard; Lena Specht; Marianne C Aznar Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 6.280