Literature DB >> 33914646

Metal artefact reduction in the oral cavity using deep learning reconstruction algorithm in ultra-high-resolution computed tomography: a phantom study.

Yuki Sakai1, Erina Kitamoto2, Kazutoshi Okamura2, Masato Tatsumi1, Takashi Shirasaka1, Ryoji Mikayama1, Masatoshi Kondo1, Hiroshi Hamasaki1, Toyoyuki Kato1, Kazunori Yoshiura2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to improve the impact of the metal artefact reduction (MAR) algorithm for the oral cavity by assessing the effect of acquisition and reconstruction parameters on an ultra-high-resolution CT (UHRCT) scanner.
METHODS: The mandible tooth phantom with and without the lesion was scanned using super-high-resolution, high-resolution (HR), and normal-resolution (NR) modes. Images were reconstructed with deep learning-based reconstruction (DLR) and hybrid iterative reconstruction (HIR) using the MAR algorithm. Two dental radiologists independently graded the degree of metal artefact (1, very severe; 5, minimum) and lesion shape reproducibility (1, slight; 5, almost perfect). The signal-to-artefact ratio (SAR), accuracy of the CT number of the lesion, and image noise were calculated quantitatively. The Tukey-Kramer method with a p-value of less than 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance.
RESULTS: The HRDLR visual score was better than the NRHIR score in terms of degree of metal artefact (4.6 ± 0.5 and 2.6 ± 0.5, p < 0.0001) and lesion shape reproducibility (4.5 ± 0.5 and 2.9 ± 1.1, p = 0.0005). The SAR of HRDLR was significantly better than that of NRHIR (4.9 ± 0.4 and 2.1 ± 0.2, p < 0.0001), and the absolute percentage error of the CT number in HRDLR was lower than that in NRHIR (0.8% in HRDLR and 23.8% in NRIR). The image noise of HRDLR was lower than that of NRHIR (15.7 ± 1.4 and 51.6 ± 15.3, p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that the combination of HR mode and DLR in UHRCT scanner improved the impact of the MAR algorithm in the oral cavity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Artefact; Deep learning; Diagnostic imaging; Multidetector computed tomography

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33914646      PMCID: PMC8474135          DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20200553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol        ISSN: 0250-832X            Impact factor:   3.525


  20 in total

Review 1.  Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT.

Authors:  Mi-Jung Lee; Sungjun Kim; Sung-Ah Lee; Ho-Taek Song; Yong-Min Huh; Dae-Hong Kim; Seung Hwan Han; Jin-Suck Suh
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 5.333

2.  Reduction of metal artifacts due to dental hardware in computed tomography angiography: assessment of the utility of model-based iterative reconstruction.

Authors:  Keita Kuya; Yuki Shinohara; Ayumi Kato; Makoto Sakamoto; Masamichi Kurosaki; Toshihide Ogawa
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 2.804

3.  Staging of the neck in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinomas: a prospective comparison of PET, ultrasound, CT and MRI.

Authors:  T Stuckensen; A F Kovács; S Adams; R P Baum
Journal:  J Craniomaxillofac Surg       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.078

4.  Deep Learning Reconstruction at CT: Phantom Study of the Image Characteristics.

Authors:  Toru Higaki; Yuko Nakamura; Jian Zhou; Zhou Yu; Takuya Nemoto; Fuminari Tatsugami; Kazuo Awai
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Effect of scan mode and focal spot size in airway dimension measurements for ultra-high-resolution computed tomography of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A COPDGene phantom study.

Authors:  Ryoji Mikayama; Takashi Shirasaka; Hidetake Yabuuchi; Yuki Sakai; Tsukasa Kojima; Masatoshi Kondo; Hideki Yoshikawa; Toyoyuki Kato
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2020-01-28       Impact factor: 2.685

6.  Analysis of metal artifact reduction tools for dental hardware in CT scans of the oral cavity: kVp, iterative reconstruction, dual-energy CT, metal artifact reduction software: does it make a difference?

Authors:  An De Crop; Jan Casselman; Tom Van Hoof; Melissa Dierens; Elke Vereecke; Nicolas Bossu; Jaime Pamplona; Katharina D'Herde; Hubert Thierens; Klaus Bacher
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 7.  Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists.

Authors:  Masaki Katsura; Jiro Sato; Masaaki Akahane; Akira Kunimatsu; Osamu Abe
Journal:  Radiographics       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.333

8.  Clinical evaluation of the normalized metal artefact reduction algorithm caused by dental fillings in CT.

Authors:  X-Y Gong; E Meyer; X-J Yu; J-H Sun; L-P Sheng; K-H Huang; R-Z Wu
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 2.419

9.  Metal artefact reduction from dental hardware in carotid CT angiography using iterative reconstructions.

Authors:  Fabian Morsbach; Moritz Wurnig; Daniel M Kunz; Andreas Krauss; Bernhard Schmidt; Spyros S Kollias; Hatem Alkadhi
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-05-19       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Deep Learning-based CT Image Reconstruction: Initial Evaluation Targeting Hypovascular Hepatic Metastases.

Authors:  Yuko Nakamura; Toru Higaki; Fuminari Tatsugami; Jian Zhou; Zhou Yu; Naruomi Akino; Yuya Ito; Makoto Iida; Kazuo Awai
Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell       Date:  2019-10-09
View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison between ultra-high-resolution computed tomographic angiography and conventional computed tomographic angiography in the visualization of the subcallosal artery.

Authors:  Yoshimichi Sato; Toshiki Endo; Shingo Kayano; Hitoshi Nemoto; Kazuki Shimada; Akira Ito; Hidenori Endo; Shunji Mugikura; Kuniyasu Niizuma; Teiji Tominaga
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2021-10-19
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.