OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative computed tomography (CT) after deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrode placement is limited due to artifacts induced by the metallic hardware, which can potentially mask intracranial postoperative complications. Different metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques have been introduced to reduce artifacts from metal hardware in CT. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a novel iterative MAR technique on image quality and diagnostic performance in the follow-up of patients with DBS electrode implementation surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen patients who had received routine intraoperative CT of the head after implantation of DBS electrodes between March 2015 and June 2015 were retrospectively included. Raw data of all patients were reconstructed with standard weighted filtered back projection (WFBP) and additionally with a novel iterative MAR algorithm. We quantified frequencies of density changes to assess quantitative artifact reduction. For evaluation of qualitative image quality, the visibility of numerous cerebral anatomic landmarks and the detectability of intracranial electrodes were scored according to a 4-point scale. Furthermore, artifact strength overall and adjacent to the electrodes was rated. RESULTS: Our results of quantitative artifact reduction showed that images reconstructed with iterative MAR (iMAR) contained significantly lower metal artifacts (overall low frequency values, 1608.6 ± 545.5; range, 375.5-3417.2) compared with the WFBP (overall low frequency values, 4487.3 ± 875.4; range, 2218.3-5783.5) reconstructed images (P < 0.004). Qualitative image analysis showed a significantly improved image quality for iMAR (overall anatomical landmarks, 2.49 ± 0.15; median, 3; range, 0-3; overall electrode characteristics, 2.35 ± 0.16; median, 2; range, 0-3; artifact characteristics, 2.16 ± 0.08; median, 2.5; range, 0-3) compared with WFBP (overall anatomical landmarks, 1.21 ± 0.64; median, 1; range, 0-3; overall electrode characteristics, 0.74 ± 0.37; median, 1; range, 0-2; artifact characteristics, 0.51 ± 0.15; median, 0.5; range, 0-2; P < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructions of cranial CT images with the novel iMAR algorithm in patients after DBS implantation allows an efficient reduction of metal artifacts near DBS electrodes compared with WFBP reconstructions. We demonstrated an improvement of quantitative and qualitative image quality of iMAR compared with WFBP in patients with DBS electrodes.
OBJECTIVES: Diagnostic accuracy of intraoperative computed tomography (CT) after deep brain stimulation (DBS) electrode placement is limited due to artifacts induced by the metallic hardware, which can potentially mask intracranial postoperative complications. Different metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques have been introduced to reduce artifacts from metal hardware in CT. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a novel iterative MAR technique on image quality and diagnostic performance in the follow-up of patients with DBS electrode implementation surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen patients who had received routine intraoperative CT of the head after implantation of DBS electrodes between March 2015 and June 2015 were retrospectively included. Raw data of all patients were reconstructed with standard weighted filtered back projection (WFBP) and additionally with a novel iterative MAR algorithm. We quantified frequencies of density changes to assess quantitative artifact reduction. For evaluation of qualitative image quality, the visibility of numerous cerebral anatomic landmarks and the detectability of intracranial electrodes were scored according to a 4-point scale. Furthermore, artifact strength overall and adjacent to the electrodes was rated. RESULTS: Our results of quantitative artifact reduction showed that images reconstructed with iterative MAR (iMAR) contained significantly lower metal artifacts (overall low frequency values, 1608.6 ± 545.5; range, 375.5-3417.2) compared with the WFBP (overall low frequency values, 4487.3 ± 875.4; range, 2218.3-5783.5) reconstructed images (P < 0.004). Qualitative image analysis showed a significantly improved image quality for iMAR (overall anatomical landmarks, 2.49 ± 0.15; median, 3; range, 0-3; overall electrode characteristics, 2.35 ± 0.16; median, 2; range, 0-3; artifact characteristics, 2.16 ± 0.08; median, 2.5; range, 0-3) compared with WFBP (overall anatomical landmarks, 1.21 ± 0.64; median, 1; range, 0-3; overall electrode characteristics, 0.74 ± 0.37; median, 1; range, 0-2; artifact characteristics, 0.51 ± 0.15; median, 0.5; range, 0-2; P < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructions of cranial CT images with the novel iMAR algorithm in patients after DBS implantation allows an efficient reduction of metal artifacts near DBS electrodes compared with WFBP reconstructions. We demonstrated an improvement of quantitative and qualitative image quality of iMAR compared with WFBP in patients with DBS electrodes.
Authors: Y Nagayama; S Tanoue; S Oda; D Sakabe; T Emoto; M Kidoh; H Uetani; A Sasao; T Nakaura; O Ikeda; K Yamada; Y Yamashita Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-12-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Wei Zhou; David J Bartlett; Felix E Diehn; Katrina N Glazebrook; Amy L Kotsenas; Rickey E Carter; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough; Shuai Leng Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Robert Forbrig; Lucas L Geyer; Robert Stahl; Jun Thorsteinsdottir; Christian Schichor; Friedrich-Wilhelm Kreth; Maximilian Patzig; Moriz Herzberg; Thomas Liebig; Franziska Dorn; Christoph G Trumm Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Nils Große Hokamp; V Neuhaus; N Abdullayev; K Laukamp; S Lennartz; A Mpotsaris; J Borggrefe Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Nils Große Hokamp; Brendan Eck; Florian Siedek; Daniel Pinto Dos Santos; Jasmin A Holz; David Maintz; Stefan Haneder Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2020-05
Authors: Ole Martin; Joel Aissa; Johannes Boos; Katrin Wingendorf; David Latz; Christian Buchbender; Susanne Gaspers; Christina Antke; Martin Sedlmair; Gerald Antoch; Benedikt M Schaarschmidt Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 3.039