Literature DB >> 24914417

Metal artifacts from titanium and steel screws in CT, 1.5T and 3T MR images of the tibial Pilon: a quantitative assessment in 3D.

Shairah Radzi1, Gary Cowin1, Mark Robinson1, Jit Pratap1, Andrew Volp1, Michael A Schuetz1, Beat Schmutz1.   

Abstract

Radiographs are commonly used to assess articular reduction of the distal tibia (pilon) fractures postoperatively, but may reveal malreductions inaccurately. While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) are potential three-dimensional (3D) alternatives they generate metal-related artifacts. This study aims to quantify the artifact size from orthopaedic screws using CT, 1.5T and 3T MRI data. Three screws were inserted into one intact human cadaver ankle specimen proximal to and along the distal articular surface, then CT, 1.5T and 3T MRI scanned. Four types of screws were investigated: titanium alloy (TA), stainless steel (SS) (Ø =3.5 mm), cannulated TA (CTA) and cannulated SS (CSS) (Ø =4.0 mm, Ø empty core =2.6 mm). 3D artifact models were reconstructed using adaptive thresholding. The artifact size was measured by calculating the perpendicular distance from the central screw axis to the boundary of the artifact in four anatomical directions with respect to the distal tibia. The artifact sizes (in the order of TA, SS, CTA and CSS) from CT were 2.0, 2.6, 1.6 and 2.0 mm; from 1.5T MRI they were 3.7, 10.9, 2.9, and 9 mm; and 3T MRI they were 4.4, 15.3, 3.8, and 11.6 mm respectively. Therefore, CT can be used as long as the screws are at a safe distance of about 2 mm from the articular surface. MRI can be used if the screws are at least 3 mm away from the articular surface except for SS and CSS. Artifacts from steel screws were too large thus obstructed the pilon from being visualised in MRI. Significant differences (P<0.05) were found in the size of artifacts between all imaging modalities, screw types and material types, except 1.5T versus 3T MRI for the SS screws (P=0.063). CTA screws near the joint surface can improve postoperative assessment in CT and MRI. MRI presents a favourable non-ionising alternative when using titanium hardware. Since these factors may influence the quality of postoperative assessment, potential improvements in operative techniques should be considered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computed tomography (CT); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); metal artifacts; pilon; tibial plafond

Year:  2014        PMID: 24914417      PMCID: PMC4032923          DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2014.03.06

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  43 in total

Review 1.  Articular fractures: does an anatomic reduction really change the result?

Authors:  J L Marsh; J Buckwalter; R Gelberman; D Dirschl; S Olson; T Brown; A Llinias
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Effects of CT image segmentation methods on the accuracy of long bone 3D reconstructions.

Authors:  Kanchana Rathnayaka; Tony Sahama; Michael A Schuetz; Beat Schmutz
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.242

3.  Imaging near metal with a MAVRIC-SEMAC hybrid.

Authors:  K M Koch; A C Brau; W Chen; G E Gold; B A Hargreaves; M Koff; G C McKinnon; H G Potter; K F King
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.668

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging artifacts caused by aneurysm clips and shunt valves: dependence on field strength (1.5 and 3 T) and imaging parameters.

Authors:  Johan Olsrud; Jimmy Lätt; Sara Brockstedt; Bertil Romner; Isabella M Björkman-Burtscher
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.813

5.  Quantification of the accuracy of MRI generated 3D models of long bones compared to CT generated 3D models.

Authors:  Kanchana Rathnayaka; Konstantin I Momot; Hansrudi Noser; Andrew Volp; Michael A Schuetz; Tony Sahama; Beat Schmutz
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 2.242

6.  Imaging of soft tissues adjacent to orthopedic hardware: comparison of 3-T and 1.5-T MRI.

Authors:  Cormac Farrelly; Amir Davarpanah; Stephen A Brennan; Stephen Brennan; Mathew Sampson; Stephen J Eustace
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 7.  Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging of the foot and ankle.

Authors:  Carolyn M Sofka
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 4.813

8.  Volumetric model determination of the tibia based on 2D radiographs using a 2D/3D database.

Authors:  P Messmer; G Long; N Suhm; P Regazzoni; A L Jacob
Journal:  Comput Aided Surg       Date:  2001

9.  Model studies on acetabular component migration in total hip arthroplasty using CT and a semiautomated program for volume merging.

Authors:  L Olivecrona; H Olivecrona; L Weidenhielm; M E Noz; G Q Maguire; M P Zeleznik
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 1.701

10.  Assessment of MRI issues at 3-Tesla for metallic surgical implants: findings applied to 61 additional skin closure staples and vessel ligation clips.

Authors:  Amreeta Gill; Frank G Shellock
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 5.364

View more
  15 in total

1.  A rare incidence of metal artifact on MRI.

Authors:  Serkan Senol; Kazim Gumus
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2017-02

2.  Can MRI accurately detect pilon articular malreduction? A quantitative comparison between CT and 3T MRI bone models.

Authors:  Shairah Radzi; Constantin Edmond Dlaska; Gary Cowin; Mark Robinson; Jit Pratap; Michael Andreas Schuetz; Sanjay Mishra; Beat Schmutz
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2016-12

Review 3.  SPECT/CT arthrography.

Authors:  Ujwal Bhure; Justus E Roos; Maria Del Sol Pérez Lago; Isabelle Steurer; Hannes Grünig; Urs Hug; Klaus Strobel
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-11-16       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 4.  Radiation myelopathy following stereotactic body radiation therapy for spine metastases.

Authors:  Wee Loon Ong; Shun Wong; Hany Soliman; Sten Myrehaug; Chia-Lin Tseng; Jay Detsky; Zain Husain; Pejman Maralani; Lijun Ma; Simon S Lo; Arjun Sahgal
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 4.506

5.  Mechanical Fatigue Performance of Patient-Specific Polymer Plates in Oncologic Mandible Reconstruction.

Authors:  Julian Lommen; Lara Schorn; Christoph Sproll; Norbert R Kübler; Luis Fernando Nicolini; Ricarda Merfort; Ayimire Dilimulati; Frank Hildebrand; Majeed Rana; Johannes Greven
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 4.964

6.  Metal artefacts severely hamper magnetic resonance imaging of the rotator cuff tendons after rotator cuff repair with titanium suture anchors.

Authors:  Femke F Schröder; Rianne Huis In't Veld; Lydia A den Otter; Sjoerd M van Raak; Bennie Ten Haken; Anne J H Vochteloo
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2017-06-05

7.  Bone Regeneration after Treatment with Covering Materials Composed of Flax Fibers and Biodegradable Plastics: A Histological Study in Rats.

Authors:  Tomasz Gredes; Franziska Kunath; Tomasz Gedrange; Christiane Kunert-Keil
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Biodegradable magnesium Herbert screw - image quality and artifacts with radiography, CT and MRI.

Authors:  Lena Sonnow; Sören Könneker; Peter M Vogt; Frank Wacker; Christian von Falck
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  [Fixed angle carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite plate for treatment of distal radius fractures : Pilot study on clinical applications].

Authors:  P Behrendt; E Kruse; T Klüter; S Fitschen-Oestern; M Weuster; L Menzdorf; J Finn; D Varoga; A Seekamp; M Müller; S Lippross
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.000

10.  The Utility of a Digital Virtual Template for Junior Surgeons in Pedicle Screw Placement in the Lumbar Spine.

Authors:  Xin Zhao; Jie Zhao; Youzhuan Xie; Jie Mi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-05-22       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.