Literature DB >> 30667317

Clinical Assessment of Metal Artifact Reduction Methods in Dual-Energy CT Examinations of Instrumented Spines.

Zaiyang Long1, David R DeLone1, Amy L Kotsenas1, Vance T Lehman1, Alex A Nagelschneider1, Gregory J Michalak1, Joel G Fletcher1, Cynthia H McCollough1, Lifeng Yu1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of three metal artifact reduction methods in dual-energy CT (DECT) examinations of instrumented spines.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with instrumented spines who underwent spine DECT were retrospectively identified. All scans were obtained on a dual-source 128-MDCT scanner. In addition to the original DE mixed images, DECT images were reconstructed using an iterative metal artifact reconstruction algorithm (DE iMAR), virtual monochromatic imaging (VMI) algorithm (DE Mono+), and a combination of the two algorithms DE iMAR and DE Mono+, which we refer to here as "DE iMAR Mono+." The four image series were anonymized and randomized for a reader study. Four experienced neuroradiologists rated the images in terms of artifact scores of four anatomic regions and overall image quality scores in both bone and soft-tissue display window settings. In addition, a quantitative analysis was performed to assess the performance of the three metal artifact reduction methods.
RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in the artifact scores and overall image quality scores among the four methods (both, p < 0.001). DE iMAR Mono+ showed the best artifact scores and quality scores (all, p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the overall image quality score was 0.779 using the bone display window and 0.892 using the soft-tissue display window (both, p < 0.001). In addition, DE iMAR Mono+ reduced the artifacts by the greatest amount in the quantitative analysis.
CONCLUSION: The method that used DE iMAR Mono+ showed the best performance of spine metal artifact reduction using DECT data. These results may be specific to this CT vendor and implant type.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dual-energy CT; iMAR; metal artifact; spine; virtual monochromatic imaging

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30667317     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.18.19757

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  2 in total

Review 1.  Recognizing and Minimizing Artifacts at Dual-Energy CT.

Authors:  Anushri Parakh; Chansik An; Simon Lennartz; Prabhakar Rajiah; Benjamin M Yeh; Frank J Simeone; Dushyant V Sahani; Avinash R Kambadakone
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 5.333

2.  Titanium versus polyetheretherketone versus structural allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A systematic review.

Authors:  Jacob L Goldberg; Ross M Meaden; Ibrahim Hussain; Pravesh S Gadjradj; Danyal Quraishi; Fabian Sommer; Joseph A Carnevale; Branden Medary; Drew Wright; K Daniel Riew; Roger Hartl
Journal:  Brain Spine       Date:  2022-08-22
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.