M Reichert1, T Ai, J N Morelli, M Nittka, U Attenberger, V M Runge. 1. 1 Department of Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Manheim, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare metal artefact reduction in MRI at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T using different sequence strategies. METHODS: Metal implants of stainless steel screw and plate within agarose phantoms and tissue specimens as well as three patients with implants were imaged at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T, using view angle tilting (VAT), slice encoding for metal artefact correction with VAT (SEMAC-VAT) and conventional sequence. Artefact reduction in agarose phantoms was quantitatively assessed by artefact volume measurements. Blinded reads were conducted in tissue specimen and human imaging, with respect to artefact size, distortion, blurring and overall image quality. Wilcoxon and Friedman tests for multiple comparisons and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interobserver agreement were performed with a significant level of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Compared with conventional sequences, SEMAC-VAT significantly reduced metal artefacts by 83% ± 9% for the screw and 89% ± 3% for the plate at 1.5 T; 72% ± 7% for the screw and 38% ± 13% for the plate at 3.0 T (p < 0.05). In qualitative analysis, SEMAC-VAT allowed for better visualization of tissue structures adjacent to the implants and produced better overall image quality with good interobserver agreement for both tissue specimen and human imaging (ICC = 0.80-0.99; p < 0.001). In addition, VAT also markedly reduced metal artefacts compared with conventional sequence, but was inferior to SEMAC-VAT. CONCLUSION: SEMAC-VAT and VAT techniques effectively reduce artefacts from metal implants relative to conventional imaging at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The feasibility of metal artefact reduction with SEMAC-VAT was demonstrated at 3.0-T MR. SEMAC-VAT significantly reduced metal artefacts at both 1.5 and 3.0 T. SEMAC-VAT allowed for better visualization of the tissue structures adjacent to the metal implants. SEMAC-VAT produced consistently better image quality in both tissue specimen and human imaging.
OBJECTIVE: To compare metal artefact reduction in MRI at both 3.0 T and 1.5 T using different sequence strategies. METHODS:Metal implants of stainless steel screw and plate within agarose phantoms and tissue specimens as well as three patients with implants were imaged at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T, using view angle tilting (VAT), slice encoding for metal artefact correction with VAT (SEMAC-VAT) and conventional sequence. Artefact reduction in agarose phantoms was quantitatively assessed by artefact volume measurements. Blinded reads were conducted in tissue specimen and human imaging, with respect to artefact size, distortion, blurring and overall image quality. Wilcoxon and Friedman tests for multiple comparisons and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for interobserver agreement were performed with a significant level of p < 0.05. RESULTS: Compared with conventional sequences, SEMAC-VAT significantly reduced metal artefacts by 83% ± 9% for the screw and 89% ± 3% for the plate at 1.5 T; 72% ± 7% for the screw and 38% ± 13% for the plate at 3.0 T (p < 0.05). In qualitative analysis, SEMAC-VAT allowed for better visualization of tissue structures adjacent to the implants and produced better overall image quality with good interobserver agreement for both tissue specimen and human imaging (ICC = 0.80-0.99; p < 0.001). In addition, VAT also markedly reduced metal artefacts compared with conventional sequence, but was inferior to SEMAC-VAT. CONCLUSION:SEMAC-VAT and VAT techniques effectively reduce artefacts from metal implants relative to conventional imaging at both 1.5 T and 3.0 T. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The feasibility of metal artefact reduction with SEMAC-VAT was demonstrated at 3.0-T MR. SEMAC-VAT significantly reduced metal artefacts at both 1.5 and 3.0 T. SEMAC-VAT allowed for better visualization of the tissue structures adjacent to the metal implants. SEMAC-VAT produced consistently better image quality in both tissue specimen and human imaging.
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: Thomas J Heyse; Le Roy Chong; Jack Davis; Friedrich Boettner; Steven B Haas; Hollis G Potter Journal: Knee Date: 2011-07-08 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Tao Ai; Abraham Padua; Frank Goerner; Mathias Nittka; Zbigniew Gugala; Siddharth Jadhav; Miguel Trelles; Raleigh F Johnson; Ronald W Lindsey; Xiaoming Li; Val M Runge Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Catherine L Hayter; Matthew F Koff; Parina Shah; Kevin M Koch; Theodore T Miller; Hollis G Potter Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Lorenzo Preda; Giorgio Conte; Luke Bonello; Caterina Giannitto; Laura L Travaini; Sara Raimondi; Paul E Summers; Ansarin Mohssen; Daniela Alterio; Maria Cossu Rocca; Chiara Grana; Francesca Ruju; Massimo Bellomi Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Maria A Schmidt; Rafal Panek; Ruth Colgan; Julie Hughes; Aslam Sohaib; Frank Saran; Julia Murray; Jason Bernard; Patrick Revell; Mathias Nittka; Martin O Leach; Vibeke N Hansen Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2016-05-21 Impact factor: 6.280