Single-energy Metal Artifact Reduction Research Articles

Effects of Subject Position on Metal Artifact Reduction of a Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis Using Computed Tomography

To validate the effects of subject position on single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) of a reverse shoulder prosthesis using computed tomography (CT). A water phantom with a reverse shoulder prosthesis was scanned at four positions on the XY plane of the CT gantry (on-center, 50 mm, 100 mm, and 150 mm from on-center in the negative direction of the X axis, respectively). We obtained images with and without SEMAR. The artifact index (AI) was measured via physical assessment. Scheffé's (Ura) paired comparison methods were performed with the amount of metal artifact by ten radiological technologists via visual assessment. The AI was significantly reduced when using SEMAR. As the phantom moved away from the on-center position, the AI increased, and metal artifacts increased in Scheffé's methods. SEMAR reduces metal artifacts of a reverse shoulder prosthesis, but metal artifacts may increase as the subject position moves away from the on-center position.

Deep Learning Reconstruction Plus Single-Energy Metal Artifact Reduction for Supra Hyoid Neck CT in Patients With Dental Metals.

Purpose: We investigated the effect of deep learning reconstruction (DLR) plus single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) on neck CT in patients with dental metals, comparing it with DLR and with hybrid iterative reconstruction (Hybrid IR)-SEMAR. Methods: In this retrospective study, 32 patients (25 men, 7 women; mean age: 63 ± 15years) with dental metals underwent contrast-enhanced CT of the oral and oropharyngeal regions. Axial images were reconstructed using DLR, Hybrid IR-SEMAR, and DLR-SEMAR. In quantitative analyses, degrees of image noise and artifacts were evaluated. In one-by-one qualitative analyses, 2 radiologists evaluated metal artifacts, the depiction of structures, and noise on five-point scales. In side-by-side qualitative analyses, artifacts and overall image quality were evaluated by comparing Hybrid IR-SEMAR with DLR-SEMAR. Results: Artifacts were significantly less with DLR-SEMAR than with DLR in quantitative (P < .001) and one-by-one qualitative (P < .001) analyses, which resulted in significantly better depiction of most structures (P < .004). Artifacts in side-by-side analysis and image noise in quantitative and one-by-one qualitative analyses (P < .001) were significantly less with DLR-SEMAR than with Hybrid IR-SEMAR, resulting in significantly better overall quality of DLR-SEMAR. Conclusions: Compared with DLR and Hybrid IR-SEMAR, DLR-SEMAR provided significantly better supra hyoid neck CT images in patients with dental metals.

Single energy metal artifact reduction performs better than virtual monoenergetic dual-energy reconstruction in CT of the equine proximal phalanx.

Metal artifacts in CT negatively impact the evaluation of surgical implants and the surrounding tissues. The aim of this prospective experimental study was to evaluate the ability of a single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR™, Canon) algorithm and virtual monoenergetic (VM) dual-energy CT (DECT) scanning techniques to reduce metal artifacts from stainless steel screws surgically inserted into the equine proximal phalanx. Seven acquisitions of 18 cadaver limbs were performed on a Canon Aquilion One Vision CT scanner (Helical +SEMAR, Volume +SEMAR, Standard Helical, Standard Volume and VM DECT at 135, 120, and 105keV) and reconstructed in a bone kernel. Blinded subjective evaluation performed by three observers indicated a significant effect of acquisition in both adjacent tissues (P<0.001) and distant tissues (P<0.001) and the best metal artifact reduction was seen with Helical +SEMAR and Volume +SEMAR. The subjective overall preference of CT acquisition type was (1) Helical +SEMAR, (2) Volume +SEMAR, (3) VM DECT 135keV, (4) VM DECT 120keV, (5) VM DECT 105keV, (6) Standard Helical, (7) Standard Volume (P<0.001). Unblinded objective evaluation performed by one observer showed that VM DECT 120keV, Helical +SEMAR, and Volume +SEMAR performed similarly and were objectively the best at reducing blooming artifact. Overall, the best metal artifact reduction was obtained with SEMAR, followed by VM DECT. However, VM DECT performance varies with energy level and was associated with decreased image quality in distant tissues and artifactual overcorrection of metal artifacts at high energy levels.

Radiotherapy planning of spine and pelvis using single-energy metal artifact reduction corrected computed tomography sets.

Metal artifacts produce incorrect Hounsfield units and impact treatment planning accuracy. This work evaluates the use of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm for treatment planning by comparison to manual artifact overriding. CT datasets of in-house 3D-printed spine and pelvic phantoms with and without metal insert(s) and two treated patients with metal implants were analysed. CT number accuracy improved with the use of SEMAR filter: root mean square deviation (RMSD) from reference (without metal) reduced by 35.4 in spine and 98.8 in hip. The plan dose volume histograms (DVHs) and dosimetric measurements showed comparable results. SEMAR reconstruction improved planning efficiency.

Deep learning reconstruction with single-energy metal artifact reduction in pelvic computed tomography for patients with metal hip prostheses

PurposeThe aim of this study was to assess the impact of the deep learning reconstruction (DLR) with single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) (DLR-S) technique in pelvic helical computed tomography (CT) images for patients with metal hip prostheses and compare it with DLR and hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) with SEMAR (IR-S).Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included 26 patients (mean age 68.6 ± 16.6 years, with 9 males and 17 females) with metal hip prostheses who underwent a CT examination including the pelvis. Axial pelvic CT images were reconstructed using DLR-S, DLR, and IR-S. In one-by-one qualitative analyses, two radiologists evaluated the degree of metal artifacts, noise, and pelvic structure depiction. In side-by-side qualitative analyses (DLR-S vs. IR-S), the two radiologists evaluated metal artifacts and overall quality. By placing regions of interest on the bladder and psoas muscle, the standard deviations of their CT attenuation were recorded, and the artifact index was calculated based on them. Results were compared between DLR-S vs. DLR and DLR vs. IR-S using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test.ResultsIn one-by-one qualitative analyses, metal artifacts and structure depiction in DLR-S were significantly better than those in DLR; however, between DLR-S and IR-S, significant differences were noted only for reader 1. Image noise in DLR-S was rated as significantly reduced compared with that in IR-S by both readers. In side-by-side analyses, both readers rated that the DLR-S images are significantly better than IR-S images regarding overall image quality and metal artifacts. The median (interquartile range) of the artifact index for DLR-S was 10.1 (4.4–16.0) and was significantly better than those for DLR (23.1, 6.5–36.1) and IR-S (11.4, 7.8–17.9).ConclusionDLR-S provided better pelvic CT images in patients with metal hip prostheses than IR-S and DLR.

Single-Energy Metal Artifact Reduction (SEMAR) in Ultra-High-Resolution CT Angiography of Patients with Intracranial Implants

To evaluate the effects of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) on image quality of ultra-high-resolution CT-angiography (UHR-CTA) with intracranial implants after aneurysm treatment. Image quality of standard and SEMAR-reconstructed UHR-CT-angiography images of 54 patients who underwent coiling or clipping was retrospectively evaluated. Image noise (i.e., index for metal-artifact strength) was analyzed in close proximity to and more distally from the metal implant. Frequencies and intensities of metal artifacts were additionally measured and intensity-differences between both reconstructions were compared in different frequencies and distances. Qualitative analysis was performed by two radiologists using a four-point Likert-scale. All measured results from both quantitative and qualitative analysis were then compared between coils and clips. Metal artifact index (MAI) and the intensity of coil-artifacts were significantly lower in SEMAR than in standard CTA in close vicinity to and more distally from the coil-package (p < 0.001, each). MAI and the intensity of clip-artifacts were significantly lower in close vicinity (p = 0.036; p < 0.001, respectively) and more distally from the clip (p = 0.007; p < 0.001, respectively). In patients with coils, SEMAR was significantly superior in all qualitative categories to standard images (p < 0.001), whereas in patients with clips, only artifacts were significantly less (p < 0.05) for SEMAR. SEMAR significantly reduces metal artifacts in UHR-CT-angiography images with intracranial implants and improves image quality and diagnostic confidence. SEMAR effects were strongest in patients with coils, whereas the effects were minor in patients with titanium-clips due to the absent of or minimal artifacts.

Evaluation of radiodensity and dimensional stability of polymeric materials used for oral stents during external beam radiotherapy of head and neck carcinomas

PurposeIntraoral stents protect the healthy tissues from ionizing radiation during external beam radiotherapy reducing mucositis, hyposalivation and osteoradionecrosis.This study investigated the radiodensity and dimensional stability of polymeric materials for suitability in construction of intraoral stents and aimed to provide clinical guidelines. MethodsSpecimens were fabricated using 4 material types namely, resin composite (ProTemp-PRO), polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) (Enamel Temp Plus-ETP, Palapress-PAL, TAB 2000-TAB), polycaprolactone (Orfit-ORF) and silicone (Adisil-ADI, Lab Putty-LAB, Memosil2-MEM, Optosil-OPT, President Plus-PRE, Siolaplast A-SIA).They were randomly assigned to measuretheir radiodensity inHounsfield Units(HU)(12x12x11mm3) (Nradiodensity = 66; n = 6)using a computer tomograph (CBCT,Toshiba Aquillon LB scanner)at baseline and after 6 weeks. The scanning protocol was applied with and without single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) scans using a slice thickness of 1 and 5 mm.The same materials have been tested for their dimensional stability (µm3)at baseline, 1, 6, 12, 24 h, 3 and 6 weeks(14 × 4 × 2 mm3)(Ndimension = 55; n = 5 per material) using stereolithography (STL) files generated by a lab scanner (L2i, Imetric4D, Courgenay, Switzerland) and analyzed using a matchingsoftware(Geomagic ControlX 2020,3D Systems).Data were analyzed using a paired t-test (alpha = 0.05). ResultsRadiodensity values (HU) were significantly affected by the material classification (p < 0.05).Polycaprolactone(43.6) presented significantly lower HU valuesfollowed by PMMA (91.3–414.9) than those of silicone materials (292.8–874.5). In terms of dimensional stability (µm3), PMMA materials (Δ:1.53–2.68) andresin composite (Δ:2.89)were significantly more dimensionally stable compared to those of silicone materials(Δ:13.64–6.63)andpolycaprolactone (Δ:-0.76) and (p < 0.05). ConclusionFor fabricating intraoral stents, when reducedradiodensity valuesarerequiredpolycaprolactone could be recommended as it fulfils the requirements for reduced radiodensity and dimensional stability. Among all silicone materials,OPT and MEMcan be recommended based on the low HU and dimensional stability.

Influence of field of view size and reconstruction methods on single-energy metal artifact reduction: a phantom study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) for metal artifacts using CT images reconstructed with adaptive iterative dose reduction three dimensional (AIDR3D) and advanced intelligent clear-IQ engine (AiCE) in calibration-field of view of various sizes. A prosthetic hip joint was arranged at the center of the phantom. The phantom images were scanned by changing calibration-field of view of 320mm and 500mm, and were reconstructed using filtered back-projection (FBP), AIDR3D, and AiCE with and without SEMAR, respectively. The metal artifact reduction with SEMAR was evaluated by calculated the relative artifact index value and visual scores in degree of artifact by seven radiology technologists. Relative artifact index of FBP, AIDR3D, and AiCE with 320mm/500mm calibration-field of views were 10.2/10.0, 16.3/16.4, and 17.8/17.9 without SEMAR, 3.3/3.1, 2.6/2.5, and 2.3/2.0 with SEMAR, respectively. Visual scores were not significantly different between 320 and 500mm calibration-field of views in all reconstruction methods. The effect of metal artifact reduction was not affected by calibration-field of view sizes in the SEMAR combined with AIDR3D or AiCE.

Reliability and benefits of single-energy projection-based metallic artifact reduction (SEMAR) in the different orthopedic hardware for the hip.

To evaluate the performance and reliability of the single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm in patients with different orthopedic hardware at the hips. A total of 153 patients with hip instrumentation who had undergone CT with adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) 3D and SEMAR algorithms between February 2015 and October 2019 were included retrospectively. Patients were divided into 5 groups by the hardware type. Two readers with 21 and 13years of experience blindly reviewed all image sets and graded the extent of artifacts and imaging quality using 5-point scales. To evaluate reliability, the mean densities and image noises were measured at the urinary bladder, veins, and fat in images with artifacts and the reference images. No significant differences were found in the mean densities of the urinary bladder, veins, and fat between the SEMAR images with artifacts (7.57 ± 9.49, 40.29 ± 23.07, 86.78 ± 38.34) and the reference images (7.77 ± 6.2, 40.27 ± 8.66, 89.10 ± 20.70) (P = .860, .994, .392). Image noises of the urinary bladder in the SEMAR images with artifacts (14.25 ± 4.50) and the SEMAR reference images (9.69 ± 1.29) were significantly higher than those in the AIDR 3D reference images (9.11 ± 1.12) (P < .001; P < .001). All AIDR 3D images were non-diagnostic (overall quality ≤ 3) and less than a quarter of the SEMAR images were non-diagnostic (16.7-23.7%), mainly in patients with prostheses [reader 1: 91.7% (22/24); reader 2: 92.6% (25/27)]. The SEMAR algorithm significantly reduces metal artifacts in CT images, more in patients with internal fixations than in patients with prostheses, and provides reliable attenuation of soft tissues.

Usefulness of Metal Artifact-reduced Reconstruction for Image-guided Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer

To evaluate the usefulness of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) for target delineation in brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients with metal hip implants. A series of four definitive brachytherapy sessions in the same patient was analyzed. At each brachytherapy session, the identical set of computed tomography images was subjected with or without SEMAR treatment. For both SEMAR-treated and -untreated sets, five radiation oncologists delineated the high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV), bladder, and rectum, for which the volume, Dice coefficient, and the dose volume parameters were compared between SEMAR-treated and -untreated datasets. The bladder volume was significantly greater in the SEMAR-treated datasets compared with the SEMAR-untreated datasets. Importantly, for the bladder, Dice coefficient among five radiation oncologists was significantly higher for the SEMAR-treated datasets compared with the SEMAR-untreated datasets. These effects of SEMAR treatment were not evident for HR-CTV and the rectum. These data indicate that SEMAR treatment contributes to improve delineation of the bladder in brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients with metal hip implants.

Reduction of metal artifacts from knee tumor prostheses on CT images: value of the single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm

BackgroundTo evaluate the effect of the single energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm with a multidetector CT (MDCT) for knee tumor prostheses.MethodsFirst, a phantom of knee tumor prosthesis underwent a MDCT scan. The raw data was reconstructed by iterative reconstruction (IR) alone and IR plus SEMAR. The mean value of the CT number and the image noise were measured around the prosthesis at the stem level and articular level. Second, 95 consecutive patients with knee tumor prostheses underwent MDCT scans. The raw data were also reconstructed by the two methods. Periprosthetic structures were selected at the similar two levels. Four radiologists visually graded the image quality on a scale from 0 to 5. Additionally, the readers also assessed the presence of prosthetic complication and tumor recurrence on a same scale.ResultsIn the phantom, when the SEMAR was used, the CT numbers were closer to normal value and the noise of images using soft and sharper kernel were respectively reduced by up to 77.1% and 43.4% at the stem level, and by up to 82.2% and 64.5% at the articular level. The subjective scores increased 1 ~ 3 points and 1 ~ 4 points at the two levels, respectively. Prosthetic complications and tumor recurrence were diagnosed in 66 patients. And the SEMAR increased the diagnostic confidence of prosthetic complications and tumor recurrence (4 ~ 5 vs. 1 ~ 1.5).ConclusionsThe SEMAR algorithm can significantly reduce the metal artifacts and increase diagnostic confidence of prosthetic complications and tumor recurrence in patients with knee tumor prostheses.

SleepTrip as a Tool to Create Analysis Pipelines for Investigations of Polysomnography in Clinical Populations

To investigate whether a newly-developed single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm applied to images acquired on a 320-MDCT volume scanner reduces image artifacts from dental metal.We inserted the lower right teeth covered with a dental metal alloy and crown in a skull phantom and performed single-volume scanning on a second-generation 320-MDCT scanner. A 12-mm diameter spherical lesion was placed either close to or far from the dental metal. The tube voltage and current were 120 kVp and 80 or 155 mA, respectively. Images were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) or iterative reconstruction (IR), with or without SEMAR. We calculated the signal-to-artifact ratios (SAR) to quantify the visibility of the lesion. Two radiologists inspected 96 images (48 with lesion and 48 without) for the presence or absence of the lesion using a 5-point ordinal scale (1 = definitely absent to 5 = definitely present).On images reconstructed with FPB and IR with SEMAR, streak artifacts from the dental metal were reduced substantially compared to images without SEMAR. At 155 mA with the lesion near the dental metal, the SARs were better on FBP and IR images (FBP: 1.7 and 0.5 with and without SEMAR, respectively; IR: 1.6 and 0.9 with and without SEMAR, respectively). The observer visual scores improved with SEMAR (FBP: 4.2 and 3.2 with and without SEMAR, respectively; IR: 4.2 and 3.0).The SEMAR algorithm reduces dental metal artifacts and improves lesion detectability and image quality in patients with oral cavity lesions.

Comparison of metal artifact reduction using single-energy CT and dual-energy CT with various metallic implants in cadavers

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of metal artifact reduction using Single Energy Metal Artifact Reduction (SEMAR) and Dual Energy CT (DECT). Materials and methodsSix cadavers containing metal implants in the head, neck, abdomen, pelvis, and extremities were scanned with Standard, SEMAR, and DECT protocols on a 320-slice CT scanner. Four specialized radiologists blinded to acquisition methods rated severity of metal artifacts, visualization of anatomic structures, diagnostic interpretation, and image preference with a 5-point grading scale. ResultsScores were significantly better for SEMAR than Standard images in the hip, knee, pelvis, abdomen, and maxillofacial scans (3.25 ± 0.88 versus 2.14 ± 0.93, p < 0.001). However, new reconstruction artifacts developed in SEMAR images that were not present in Standard images. Scores for severity of metal artifacts and visualization of smooth structures were significantly better for DECT than Standard images in the cervical spine (3.50±0.50 versus 2.0±0.58, p < 0.001) and was preferred over Standard images by one radiologist. In all other cases, radiologists preferred the Standard image over the DECT image due to increased image noise and reduced low-contrast resolution with DECT. In all cases, SEMAR was preferred over Standard and DECT images. ConclusionSEMAR was more effective at reducing metal artifacts than DECT. Radiologists should be aware of new artifacts and review both the original and SEMAR images. When the anatomy or implant is relatively small, DECT may be superior to SEMAR without additional artifacts. However, radiologist should be aware of a reduction in soft tissue contrast.

Combined application of single-energy metal artifact reduction and reconstruction techniques in patients with Cochlear implants

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to develop an effective method of reducing metal artifacts in cochlear implant (CI) electrodes.MethodsThe temporal bones of 30 patients (34 ears) after CI were examined with 320-detector row computed tomography, which was evaluated by two senior radiologists using a double-blind method. Noise, artifact index, signal-to-noise ratio, and the subjective image quality score were compared before versus after using single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR). The electrode position, single electrode visibility, and electrode count were evaluated using SEMAR combined with either multi-planar reconstruction (MPR) or maximum intensity projection.ResultsThe two radiologists’ measurements had good consistency. SEMAR significantly reduced the image noise and artifacts index and significantly improved the signal-to-noise ratio and subjective image quality score (P < 0.01). The combination of SEMAR with MPR was conducive to accurate assessment of electrode position and single-electrode visibility. The combination of SEMAR with MIP facilitated accurate and intuitive matching of the assessed electrode count with the number of electrodes implanted during the operation (P = 0.062).ConclusionSEMAR significantly reduces metal artifacts generated by CI electrodes and improves the quality of computed tomography images. The combination of SEMAR with MPR and maximum intensity projection is beneficial for evaluating the position and number of CI electrodes.

Lateral Position With Gantry Tilt Further Improves Computed Tomography Image Quality Reconstructed Using Single-Energy Metal Artifact Reduction Algorithm in the Oral Cavity.

To assess the limitations of single-energy metal artifact reduction algorithm in the oral cavity and evaluate the availability of a solution by setting the patient in a lateral position (LP) with the use of a gantry tilt (GT). We analyzed 88 patients with dental metals retrospectively in study 1, and 74 patients prospectively in study 2. Patients were classified: metal I with dental metals in 1 region, metal II in 2 regions, and metal III in 3 regions. Patients underwent neck computed tomography examinations in a supine position (SP) in study 1, and 2 positions, an LP with a GT and an SP, in study 2. All images were reconstructed with this algorithm. Image quality was scored using a 4-point scale: 1 = severe artifact, 2 = moderate artifact, 3 = slight artifact, 4 = no artifact. The scores were compared between metal I, metal II, and metal III using the Mann-Whitney U test in study 1, and between an LP with a GT and an SP using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test in study 2. The scores outside the dental arch were significantly higher in metal I than in metal II and metal III (3.0 ± 0.6 vs 2.3 ± 0.5 vs 2.2 ± 0.4; P < 0.0001 for metal I vs metal II and for metal I vs metal III) and significantly higher in an LP with a GT than an SP (3.2 ± 0.4 vs 2.3 ± 0.4; P < 0.0001). Single-energy metal artifact reduction algorithm could reduce metal artifacts adequately in patients with dental metals in 1 region, but not in 2 or more regions. However, even for the latter, combination of this algorithm and an LP with a GT could further improve the image quality.

The effect of the reconstruction algorithm for the pulmonary nodule detection under the metal artifact caused by a pacemaker.

The aim was to compare the effects of metal artifacts from a pacemaker on pulmonary nodule detection among computed tomography (CT) images reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP), single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR), and forward-projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST).Nine simulated nodules were placed inside a chest phantom with a pacemaker. CT images reconstructed using FBP, SEMAR, and FIRST were acquired at low and standard dose, and were evaluated by 2 independent radiologists.FIRST demonstrated the most significantly improved metal artifact and nodule detection on low dose CT (P < .0032), except at 10 mA and 5-mm thickness. At standard-dose CT, SEMAR showed the most significant metal artifact reduction (P < .00001). In terms of nodule detection, no significant differences were observed between FIRST and SEMAR (P = .161).With a pacemaker present, FIRST showed the best nodule detection ability at low-dose CT and SEMAR is comparable to FIRST at standard dose CT.

Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer's metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom.

BACKGROUND: Metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques can improve metal artifacts of computed tomography (CT) images.OBJECTIVE: This work focused on conducting a quantitative analysis to compare the effectiveness of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants (hip implant, spinal implant, and dental filling) with a self-made acrylic phantom.METHODS: A cylindrical phantom was made from acrylic with a groove in the middle, and then three types of metal implants were placed in the groove. The phantom was scanned by four CT scanners and four commercialized MAR techniques were used to analyze the images. The techniques used were single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR, Canon), smart metal artifact reduction software (Smart-MAR, GE), iterative metal artifact reduction (IMAR, Siemens), and metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants (OMAR, Philips). Quantitative analysis methods included objective and subjective analysis.RESULTS: The expected value of SEMAR, Smart-MAR, IMAR, and OMAR were 36.6, 37.8, 5.0, and 2.3, respectively. SEMAR and Smart-MAR achieved optimal results.CONCLUSION: This study successfully evaluated the effects of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants in a phantom. All MAR techniques effectively reduced metal artifacts, but the effect was not significant with dental fillings due to high-density material.

Performance of single-energy metal artifact reduction in cardiac computed tomography: A clinical and phantom study

BackgroundTo investigate the performance of a reconstruction algorithm, single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR), against standard reconstruction in cardiac computed tomography (CT) studies of patients with implanted metal and in a defibrillator lead phantom. MethodsFrom a retrospective, cross-sectional clinical study with institutional review board approval of 118 patients with implanted metal, 122 cardiac CT studies from November 2009 to August 2016 performed on a 320-detector row scanner with standard and SEMAR reconstructions were included. The maximum beam hardening artifact radius, artifact attenuation variation surrounding the implanted metal, and image quality on a 4-point scale (1-no/minimal artifact to 4-severe artifact) were assessed for each reconstruction. A defibrillator lead phantom study was performed at different tube potentials and currents with both reconstruction methods. Maximum beam hardening artifact radius and average artifact attenuation variation were measured. ResultsIn the clinical study, SEMAR markedly reduced the maximum beam hardening artifact radius by 77% (standard: 14.8 mm [IQR 9.7–22.2] vs. SEMAR: 3.4 mm [IQR 2.2–7.1], p < 0.0001) and artifact attenuation variation by 51% (standard: 130.0 HU [IQR 75.9–184.4] vs. SEMAR: 64.3 HU [IQR 48.2–89.2], p < 0.0001). Image quality improved with SEMAR (standard: 3 [IQR 2–3.5] vs. SEMAR: 2 [IQR 1–2.5], p < 0.0001). The defibrillator lead phantom study confirmed these results across varying tube potentials and currents. ConclusionsSEMAR reconstruction achieved superior image quality and markedly reduced maximum beam hardening artifact radius and artifact attenuation variation compared to standard reconstruction in 122 clinical cardiac CT studies of patients with implanted metal and in a defibrillator lead phantom study.

Single-Energy Retrospective Metal Artifact Reduction Using Adaptive Thresholding for Metal Implants in the Abdomen and Pelvis.

To assess impact of single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm utilizing retrospective adaptive thresholding in reducing metal artifacts in the abdomen and pelvis. In this prospective institutional review board-approved, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant study, 90 patients with various metals (n = 97) on computed tomography of abdomen and pelvis (Canon Medical, Aquilion ONE and PRIME) scanned 07/2017-09/2018 with SEMAR retrospectively applied were included. Density was measured in the near and far field to the metals. Density standard deviation (SD), representing artifact severity, was compared with and without SEMAR applied. Two trained human observers independently evaluated severity of artifacts on a five-point scale (0, no artifact; 5, severe artifact). The SEMAR significantly decreased artifact severity in the near field of high-density metal implants (SD of 204 ± 101HU without vs. 66 ± 40HU with SEMAR, P < 0.001). In the far field, the artifact severity was similar (40 ± 31HU without vs. 36 ± 27HU with SEMAR, P = 0.41). Artifact severity was decreased adjacent to low-density metal in the near field (SD of 86 ± 56HU without vs 49 ± 30HU with SEMAR, P < 0.001). In the far field to the low-density metals artifact severity was similar (33 ± 29HU without vs. 31 ± 27HU with SEMAR, P = 0.79). Subjectively, artifacts severity decreased for high-density metals in near field by 1.3 ± 1.0, and in far field by 0.7 ± 0.7 and for low-density metals in the near field by 0.7 ± 1.0, far field 0.4 ± 0.5, all P < 0.05. The SEMAR retrospective algorithm with adaptive thresholding subjectively and objectively reduced near-field artifacts generated by high- and low-density metals.

Metal artifact reduction for small metal implants on CT: Which image reconstruction algorithm performs better?

PurposeTo compare the performance of different image reconstruction algorithms in the presence of small metal objects of different sizes and at different dose levels. MethodA fresh bone of bovine femur was drilled with seven drill bits of increasing diameter. CT images with eight different dose levels were acquired and reconstructed with three algorithms: hybrid iterative reconstruction – HIR, Full model-based iterative reconstruction – full MBIR and a single energy metal artifact reduction – SEMAR. Trabecular distortion adjacent to metal was evaluated subjectively with a four-point scale. Edge profile artifacts were evaluated quantitatively by measuring drill bit diameter overestimation and the width of the low-density halo surrounding the drill bit. ResultsTrabecular distortion was higher with full MBIR compared to HIR and SEMAR (P < 0.0001) and increased with drill bits larger than 1.2 mm and with doses lower than 18.1 mGy.cm. Low-density halos size and drill bit diameter overestimation decreased with full MBIR compared to the other two reconstruction algorithms and with SEMAR compared to HIR (P < 0.0001). There was a mean drill bit overestimation of 0.56 ± 0.25 mm for full MBIR versus 0.68 ± 0.09 mm for SEMAR and mean low-density halo diameters of 0.03 mm ± 0.08 for full MBIR versus 0.42 mm ± 0.09 for SEMAR. ConclusionAlgorithm performance is influenced by dose levels and metal object size and no individual algorithm provides the best overall performance. Full MBIR is better in reducing edge artifacts and SEMAR is the best option for larger metal implants and low dose protocols.