Metal artifact reduction (MAR) based on two-compartment physical modeling: evaluation in patients with hip implants

Boos, Johannes; Sawicki, L; Lanzman, Rotem S.; Thomas, Christoph; Aissa, Joel; Schleich, Christoph; Heusch, Philipp; Antoch, Gerald; Kröpil, Patric

doi:10.1177/0284185116633911

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in accordance to previous CT-studies demonstrating a reduction of image artifacts when using iMAR algorithms. 7,12 In contrast to these results with the iMAR algorithm, MARIS had no significant impact on HU values in phantom scan and patient examinations in PET/CT. These findings also translate to PET: In the phantom measurement, iMAR leads to more accurate quantitative SUV measurement adjacent to large metal implants.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

“…In recent studies, the iMAR algorithm improved CT image quality and reduced metal artifacts from large metal artifacts and dental implants. 7,16 As PET reconstructions in integrated PET/CT scanners are based on CT data, iMAR was found to influence PET attenuation correction in phantom measurements. Preliminary data also indicate a change of SUV values of different radiotracers when using the iMAR algorithm in patients with metal implants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent years, different techniques for CT metal artifact reduction (MAR) such as beam-hardening correction, 6 segmentation with interpolation 7 or dual-energy CT 8 have been introduced into clinical practice. While dual-energy Objective: To evaluate the impact of different metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms on Hounsfield unit (HU) and standardized uptake values (SUV) in a phantom setting and verify these results in patients with metallic implants undergoing oncological PET/CT examinations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Impact of different metal artifact reduction techniques on attenuation correction in 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations

Martin

Aissa

Boos

et al. 2019

The British Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the impact of different metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms on Hounsfield unit (HU) and standardized uptake values (SUV) in a phantom setting and verify these results in patients with metallic implants undergoing oncological PET/CT examinations. Methods and materials: In this prospective study, PET-CT examinations of 28 oncological patients (14 female, 14 male, mean age 69.5 ± 15.2y) with 38 different metal implants were included. CT datasets were reconstructed using standard weighted filtered back projection (WFBP) without MAR, MAR in image space (MARIS) and iterative MAR (iMAR, hip algorithm). The three datasets were used for PET attenuation correction. SUV and HU measurements were performed at the site of the most prominent bright and dark band artifacts. Differences between HU and SUV values across the different reconstructions were compared using paired t-tests. Bonferroni correction was used to prevent alpha-error accumulation (p < 0.017). Results: For bright band artifacts, MARIS led to a non-significant mean decrease of 12.0% (345 ± 315 HU) in comparison with WFBP (391 ± 293 HU), whereas iMAR led to a significant decrease of 68.3% (125 ± 185 HU, p < 0.017). For SUVmean, MARIS showed no significant effect in comparison with WFBP (WFBP: 0.99 ± 0.40, MARIS: 0.96 ± 0.39), while iMAR led to a significant decrease of 11.1% (0.88 ± 0.35, p < 0.017). Similar results were observed for dark band artifacts. Conclusion: iMAR significantly reduces artifacts caused by metal implants in CT and thus leads to a significant change of SUV measurements in bright and dark band artifacts compared with WFBP and MARIS, thus probably improving PET quantification. Advances in knowledge: The present work indicates that MAR algorithms such as iMAR algorithm in integrated PET/CT scanners are useful to improve CT image quality as well as PET quantification in the evaluation of tracer uptake adjacent to large metal implants. A detailed analysis of oncological patients with various large metal implants using different MAR algorithms in PET/CT has not been conducted yet.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 58%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of different metal artifact reduction techniques on attenuation correction in 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations

Martin

Aissa

Boos

et al. 2019

The British Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They concluded the overall image quality in pelvic cavity with MAR algorithm was improved but new artifacts were also observed when using the MAR algorithm. Similar observation was made by other groups [6] [14] [20].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Evaluation of New Commercially Available Metal Artifact Reduction (MAR) Algorithm on Both Image Quality and Relative Dosimetry for Patients with Hip Prosthesis or Dental Fillings

Huang¹,

Kohli²

2017

IJMPCERO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Streaking artifacts on computed tomography (CT) images are caused by high density materials such as hip prosthesis, surgical clips and dental fillings. The artifacts can lead to compromised clinical outcome due to the inability to differentiate tumor volume and the uncertainties in dose calculation. The goals of our study are to evaluate how GE's smart metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm impacts image quality on phantoms and dosimetry on head and neck patients with dental fillings and pelvic patients with hip prosthesis. Treatment plans calculated on the MAR and non-MAR datasets with the same beam arrangements and fluence are compared. Dose differences between the MAR and non-MAR datasets are not significant. However, substantial reductions of metal artifacts are observed when MAR algorithm is applied. Planning on the MAR dataset is recommended since it improves image quality and CT number accuracy. It also negates the need to contour the artifacts and override the density which can be time consuming.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, overall artefact degree was rated separately for near field (<3 cm from the metal) and far field (≥3 cm from the metal) on a five-point scale according to previous studies 13 (1: severe artefacts; 2: strong artefacts; 3: moderate artefacts; 4: mild artefacts; 5: no artefact).…”

Section: Subjective Image Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Iterative metal artefact reduction (MAR) in postsurgical chest CT: comparison of three iMAR-algorithms

Aissa

Boos

Sawicki

et al. 2017

The British Journal of Radiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All three iMAR algorithms led to a significant reduction of metal artefacts and increase in overall image quality compared with WFBP in chest CT of patients with metallic implants in subjective and objective analysis. The iMARAlgo2 and iMARAlgo3 were best for mild artefacts. IMARAlgo1 was superior for severe artefacts. Advances in knowledge: Iterative MAR led to significant artefact reduction and increase image-quality compared with WFBP in CT after implementation of thoracic devices. Adjusting iMAR-algorithms to patients' metallic implants can help to improve image quality in CT.

show abstract

Metal artifact reduction (MAR) based on two-compartment physical modeling: evaluation in patients with hip implants

Abstract: The investigated MAR algorithm led to a significant reduction of artifacts from metallic hip implants. The highest MAR level provided the least severe artifacts and the best overall image quality.

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

Impact of different metal artifact reduction techniques on attenuation correction in 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations

Impact of different metal artifact reduction techniques on attenuation correction in 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations

Evaluation of New Commercially Available Metal Artifact Reduction (MAR) Algorithm on Both Image Quality and Relative Dosimetry for Patients with Hip Prosthesis or Dental Fillings

Iterative metal artefact reduction (MAR) in postsurgical chest CT: comparison of three iMAR-algorithms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About