PURPOSE: To evaluate the distortion and artifact area of metal in MR images and to compare artifact reduction using different metal artifact-reducing sequences in patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) and non-MoM total hip prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six MoM and 15 non-MoM prostheses were examined in a 1.5-T MR scanner using T1-weighted (T1-w) sequences: turbo spin echo (TSE) high-readout bandwidth (hiBW), T1-w; TSE view angle tilting (VAT), T1-w; TSE VAT + slice encoding for metal artifact correction (SEMAC); short tau inversion recovery (STIR) hiBW or matched RF pulses (mRFp). Distortion was quantified using a new method measuring the acetabular roof angle (ARA). The artifact area was defined in the mid-coronal plane of the artifact. RESULTS: The T1 VAT + SEMAC sequence showed the least distortion compared to T1 VAT and T1-hiBW (150°, 127° and 102°, p < 0.001, in MoM; 152°, 143° and 128°, p ≤ 0.014, in non-MoM). The artifact area was smaller in MoM prostheses using the T1 VAT sequence compared to T1 hiBW and T1 VAT + SEMAC (2506 mm(2), 3160 mm(2) and 3214 mm(2), p < 0.001) and smaller in non-MoM prostheses using T1 VAT compared to T1-hiBW (4296 mm(2) and 4831 mm(2), p = 0.041). STIR-mRFp substantially reduced the artifact size compared with STIR-hiBW (MoM 4559 mm(2) and 6323 mm(2); non-MoM 5625 mm(2) and 8764 mm(2), p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Metal artifacts in MR imaging examinations of hip prostheses can be evaluated for distortion using a distortion angle (ARA) and the degree of signal artifact as determined by measuring the largest cross-sectional artifact area. T1 VAT + SEMAC showed the least distortion; T1 VAT and STIR-mRFp were most efficient for reduction of the artifact area.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the distortion and artifact area of metal in MR images and to compare artifact reduction using different metal artifact-reducing sequences in patients with metal-on-metal (MoM) and non-MoM total hip prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six MoM and 15 non-MoM prostheses were examined in a 1.5-T MR scanner using T1-weighted (T1-w) sequences: turbo spin echo (TSE) high-readout bandwidth (hiBW), T1-w; TSE view angle tilting (VAT), T1-w; TSE VAT + slice encoding for metal artifact correction (SEMAC); short tau inversion recovery (STIR) hiBW or matched RF pulses (mRFp). Distortion was quantified using a new method measuring the acetabular roof angle (ARA). The artifact area was defined in the mid-coronal plane of the artifact. RESULTS: The T1 VAT + SEMAC sequence showed the least distortion compared to T1 VAT and T1-hiBW (150°, 127° and 102°, p < 0.001, in MoM; 152°, 143° and 128°, p ≤ 0.014, in non-MoM). The artifact area was smaller in MoM prostheses using the T1 VAT sequence compared to T1 hiBW and T1 VAT + SEMAC (2506 mm(2), 3160 mm(2) and 3214 mm(2), p < 0.001) and smaller in non-MoM prostheses using T1 VAT compared to T1-hiBW (4296 mm(2) and 4831 mm(2), p = 0.041). STIR-mRFp substantially reduced the artifact size compared with STIR-hiBW (MoM 4559 mm(2) and 6323 mm(2); non-MoM 5625 mm(2) and 8764 mm(2), p < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Metal artifacts in MR imaging examinations of hip prostheses can be evaluated for distortion using a distortion angle (ARA) and the degree of signal artifact as determined by measuring the largest cross-sectional artifact area. T1 VAT + SEMAC showed the least distortion; T1 VAT and STIR-mRFp were most efficient for reduction of the artifact area.
Authors: L M White; J K Kim; M Mehta; N Merchant; M E Schweitzer; W B Morrison; C R Hutchison; A E Gross Journal: Radiology Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Brian A Hargreaves; Pauline W Worters; Kim Butts Pauly; John M Pauly; Kevin M Koch; Garry E Gold Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Hollis G Potter; Bryan J Nestor; Carolyn M Sofka; Stephanie T Ho; Lance E Peters; Eduardo A Salvati Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 5.284
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
Authors: Christoph Germann; Lukas Filli; Pia M Jungmann; Dimitri N Graf; Jan Fritz; Christian W A Pfirrmann; Reto Sutter Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 2.199