nach oben

Erschienen in:

03.05.2018 | Computed Tomography

CT metal artifacts in patients with total hip replacements: for artifact reduction monoenergetic reconstructions and post-processing algorithms are both efficient but not similar

verfasst von: Kai Roman Laukamp, Simon Lennartz, Victor-Frederic Neuhaus, Nils Große Hokamp, Robert Rau, Markus Le Blanc, Nuran Abdullayev, Anastasios Mpotsaris, David Maintz, Jan Borggrefe

Erschienen in: European Radiology | Ausgabe 11/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

This study compares metal artifact (MA) reduction in imaging of total hip replacements (THR) using virtual monoenergetic images (VMI), for MA-reduction-specialized reconstructions (MAR) and conventional CT images (CI) from detector-based dual-energy computed tomography (SDCT).

Methods

Twenty-seven SDCT-datasets of patients carrying THR were included. CI, MAR and VMI with different energy-levels (60–200 keV) were reconstructed from the same scans. MA width was measured. Attenuation (HU), noise (SD) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were determined in: extinction artifact, adjacent bone, muscle and bladder. Two radiologists assessed MA-reduction and image quality visually.

Results

In comparison to CI, VMI (200 keV) and MAR showed a strong artifact reduction (MA width: CI 29.9±6.8 mm, VMI 17.6±13.6 mm, p<0.001; MAR 16.5±14.9 mm, p<0.001; MA density: CI -412.1±204.5 HU, VMI -279.7±283.7 HU; p<0.01; MAR -116.74±105.6 HU, p<0.001). In strong artifacts reduction was superior by MAR. In moderate artifacts VMI was more effective. MAR showed best noise reduction and CNR in bladder and muscle (p<0.05), whereas VMI were superior for depiction of bone (p<0.05). Visual assessment confirmed that VMI and MAR improve artifact reduction and image quality (p<0.001).

Conclusions

MAR and VMI (200 keV) yielded significant MA reduction. Each showed distinct advantages both regarding effectiveness of artifact reduction, MAR regarding assessment of soft tissue and VMI regarding assessment of bone.

Key Points

• Spectral-detector computed tomography improves assessment of total hip replacements and surrounding tissue.

• Virtual monoenergetic images and MAR reduce metal artifacts and enhance image quality.

• Evaluation of bone, muscle and pelvic organs can be improved by SDCT.

Fayad LM, Patra A, Fishman EK (2009) Value of 3D CT in defining skeletal complications of orthopedic hardware in the postoperative patient. Am J Roentgenol 193:1155–1163CrossRef

Lee M-J, Kim S, Lee S-A et al (2007) Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. RadioGraphics 27:791–803CrossRef

Mori I, Machida Y, Osanai M, Iinuma K (2013) Photon starvation artifacts of x-ray CT: their true cause and a solution. Radiol Phys Technol 6:130–141CrossRef

Boas FE, Fleischmann D (2012) CT artifacts: causes and reduction techniques. Imaging Med 4:229–240CrossRef

Gwam CU, Mistry JB, Mohamed NS, et al (2017) Current epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States: national inpatient sample 2009 to 2013. J Arthroplast

Katz JN, Wright EA, Wright J et al (2012) Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the U.S. Medicare population. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:1825–1832CrossRef

Neuhaus V, Große Hokamp N, Abdullayev N et al (2017) Metal artifact reduction by dual-layer computed tomography using virtual monoenergetic images. Eur J Radiol 93:143–148CrossRef

Lewis M, Reid K, Toms AP (2013) Reducing the effects of metal artefact using high keV monoenergetic reconstruction of dual energy CT (DECT) in hip replacements. Skeletal Radiol 42:275–282CrossRef

Andersson KM, Nowik P, Persliden J et al (2015) Metal artefact reduction in CT imaging of hip prostheses—an evaluation of commercial techniques provided by four vendors. Br J Radiol 88:20140473CrossRef

10.

Kidoh M, Nakaura T, Nakamura S et al (2014) Reduction of dental metallic artefacts in CT: value of a newly developed algorithm for metal artefact reduction (O-MAR). Clin Radiol 69:e11–e16CrossRef

11.

Philips CT Clinical Science PHU (2012) Metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants (O-MAR) [Philips NetForum Community]. Available via http://clinical.netforum.healthcare.philips.com/us_en/Explore/White-Papers/CT/Metal-Artifact-Reduction-for-Orthopedic-Implants-(O-MAR). Accessed 01 July 2017

12.

Boomsma MF, Warringa N, Edens MA et al (2016) Quantitative analysis of orthopedic metal artefact reduction in 64-slice computed tomography scans in large head metal-on-metal total hip replacement, a phantom study. Springerplus 5:405CrossRef

13.

Al-Senan R, Yester M (2013) SU-E-I-21: metal artifact reduction in CT for surgical screws: comparison between two commercially available software packages. Med Phys 40:129–129CrossRef

14.

Flohr TG, McCollough CH, Bruder H et al (2006) First performance evaluation of a dual-source CT (DSCT) system. Eur Radiol 16:256–268CrossRef

15.

Wellenberg RHH, Boomsma MF, van Osch JAC et al (2017) Quantifying metal artefact reduction using virtual monochromatic dual-layer detector spectral CT imaging in unilateral and bilateral total hip prostheses. Eur J Radiol 88:61–70CrossRef

16.

Silva AC, Morse BG, Hara AK et al (2011) Dual-energy (spectral) CT: applications in abdominal imaging. RadioGraphics 31:1031–1046CrossRef

17.

McCollough CH, Leng S, Yu L, Fletcher JG (2015) Dual- and multi-energy CT: principles, technical approaches, and clinical applications. Radiology 276:637–653CrossRef

18.

Alvarez RE, Macovski A (1976) Energy-selective reconstructions in x-ray computerized tomography. Phys Med Biol 21:2CrossRef

19.

Neuhaus V, Abdullayev N, Große Hokamp N et al (2017) Improvement of image quality in unenhanced dual-layer CT of the head using virtual monoenergetic images compared with polyenergetic single-energy CT. Invest Radiol 1.

20.

Likert R (1932) A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol 140:1–55

21.

Dong Y, Shi AJ, Wu JL et al (2016) Metal artifact reduction using virtual monochromatic images for patients with pedicle screws implants on CT. Eur Spine J 25:1754–1763CrossRef

22.

Komlosi P, Grady D, Smith JS et al (2015) Evaluation of monoenergetic imaging to reduce metallic instrumentation artifacts in computed tomography of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg Spine 22:34–38CrossRef

23.

Filograna L, Magarelli N, Leone A et al (2015) Value of monoenergetic dual-energy CT (DECT) for artefact reduction from metallic orthopedic implants in post-mortem studies. Skeletal Radiol 44:1287–1294CrossRef

24.

Große Hokamp N, Neuhaus V, Abdullayev N, et al (2017) Reduction of artifacts caused by orthopedic hardware in the spine in spectral detector CT examinations using virtual monoenergetic image reconstructions and metal-artifact-reduction algorithms. Skeletal Radiol 1–7.

25.

Bisschop R, Boomsma M, Van Raay JJA et al (2013) High prevalence of pseudotumors in patients with a Birmingham hip resurfacing prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol 95:1554–1560. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.00716 CrossRef

26.

Aissa J, Thomas C, Sawicki LM et al (2017) Iterative metal artefact reduction in CT: can dedicated algorithms improve image quality after spinal instrumentation? Clin Radiol 72:428.e7–428.e12CrossRef

27.

Mangold S, Gatidis S, Luz O et al (2014) Single-source dual-energy computed tomography. Invest Radiol 49:788–793CrossRef

Titel: CT metal artifacts in patients with total hip replacements: for artifact reduction monoenergetic reconstructions and post-processing algorithms are both efficient but not similar
verfasst von: Kai Roman Laukamp
Simon Lennartz
Victor-Frederic Neuhaus
Nils Große Hokamp
Robert Rau
Markus Le Blanc
Nuran Abdullayev
Anastasios Mpotsaris
David Maintz
Jan Borggrefe
Publikationsdatum: 03.05.2018
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Radiology / Ausgabe 11/2018
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5414-2

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

CT metal artifacts in patients with total hip replacements: for artifact reduction monoenergetic reconstructions and post-processing algorithms are both efficient but not similar