Koichiro Yasaka1,2, Eriko Maeda3, Shouhei Hanaoka3, Masaki Katsura3, Jiro Sato3, Kuni Ohtomo3. 1. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan. koyasaka@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, 4-6-1 Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan. koyasaka@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiology, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the quality of helical computed tomography (CT) images of the pelvis in patients with metal hip prostheses reconstructed using adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) and AIDR with single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR-A). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 28 patients (mean age, 64.6 ± 11.4 years; 6 men and 22 women). CT images were reconstructed using AIDR and SEMAR-A. Two radiologists evaluated the extent of metal artifacts and the depiction of structures in the pelvic region and looked for mass lesions. A radiologist placed a region of interest within the bladder and recorded CT attenuation. RESULTS: The metal artifacts were significantly reduced in SEMAR-A as compared to AIDR (p < 0.0001). The depictions of the bladder, ureter, prostate/uterus, rectum, and pelvic sidewall were significantly better with SEMAR-A than with AIDR (p < 0.02). All lesions were diagnosed with SEMAR-A, while some were not diagnosed with AIDR. The median and interquartile range (in parentheses) of CT attenuation within the bladder for AIDR were -34.0 (-46.6 to -15.0) Hounsfield units (HU) and were more variable than those seen for SEMAR-A [5.4 (-1.3 to 11.1)] HU (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: In comparison with AIDR, SEMAR-A provided pelvic CT images of significantly better quality for patients with metal hip prostheses.
PURPOSE: To compare the quality of helical computed tomography (CT) images of the pelvis in patients with metal hip prostheses reconstructed using adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) and AIDR with single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR-A). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 28 patients (mean age, 64.6 ± 11.4 years; 6 men and 22 women). CT images were reconstructed using AIDR and SEMAR-A. Two radiologists evaluated the extent of metal artifacts and the depiction of structures in the pelvic region and looked for mass lesions. A radiologist placed a region of interest within the bladder and recorded CT attenuation. RESULTS: The metal artifacts were significantly reduced in SEMAR-A as compared to AIDR (p < 0.0001). The depictions of the bladder, ureter, prostate/uterus, rectum, and pelvic sidewall were significantly better with SEMAR-A than with AIDR (p < 0.02). All lesions were diagnosed with SEMAR-A, while some were not diagnosed with AIDR. The median and interquartile range (in parentheses) of CT attenuation within the bladder for AIDR were -34.0 (-46.6 to -15.0) Hounsfield units (HU) and were more variable than those seen for SEMAR-A [5.4 (-1.3 to 11.1)] HU (p = 0.033). CONCLUSION: In comparison with AIDR, SEMAR-A provided pelvic CT images of significantly better quality for patients with metal hip prostheses.
Entities:
Keywords:
Computed tomography; Metal artifact reduction; Metal hip prosthesis; Pelvis
Authors: Christine L Gray Sears; John F Ward; Stephen T Sears; Michael F Puckett; Christopher J Kane; Christopher L Amling Journal: J Urol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Christopher E Desch; Al B Benson; Mark R Somerfield; Patrick J Flynn; Carol Krause; Charles L Loprinzi; Bruce D Minsky; David G Pfister; Katherine S Virgo; Nicholas J Petrelli Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-10-31 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Shandra Bipat; Afina S Glas; Jacobus van der Velden; Aeilko H Zwinderman; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Jaap Stoker Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Ruud H H Wellenberg; Jochen A C van Osch; Henk J Boelhouwers; Mireille A Edens; Geert J Streekstra; Harmen B Ettema; Martijn F Boomsma Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2019-04-24 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Holly M Parenica; Panayiotis Mavroidis; William Jones; Gregory Swanson; Niko Papanikolaou; Sotirios Stathakis Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019 Jan-Dec