Metal Artifact Reduction With Tin Prefiltration in Computed Tomography: A Cadaver Study for Comparison With Other Novel Techniques. Issue 3 (March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hackenbroch, Carsten; Schüle, Simone; Halt, Daniel; Zengerle, Laura; Beer, Meinrad
• Is Part Of: Investigative radiology. Volume 57:Issue 3(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-03
• Subjects: metal artifact reduction -- computed tomography -- dual-energy CT -- tin prefiltration -- iterative metal artifact reduction software; Diagnosis, Radioscopic -- Periodicals; Radiology, Medical -- Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000823
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-9996

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: With the aging population and thus rising numbers of orthopedic implants (OIs), metal artifacts (MAs) increasingly pose a problem for computed tomography (CT) examinations. In the study presented here, different MA reduction techniques (iterative metal artifact reduction software [iMAR], tin prefilter technique, and dual-energy CT [DECT]) were compared. Materials and Methods: Four human cadaver pelvises with OIs were scanned on a third-generation DECT scanner using tin prefilter (Sn), dual-energy (DE), and conventional protocols. Virtual monoenergetic CT images were generated from DE data sets. Postprocessing of CT images was performed using iMAR. Qualitative (bony structures, MA, image noise) image analysis using a 6-point Likert scale and quantitative image analysis (contrast-to-noise ratio, standard deviation of background noise) were performed by 2 observers. Statistical testing was performed using Friedman test with Nemenyi test as a post hoc test. Results: The iMAR Sn 150 kV protocol provided the best overall assessability of bony structures and the lowest subjective image noise. The iMAR DE protocol and virtual monochromatic image (VMI) ± iMAR achieved the most effective metal artifact reduction (MAR) ( P < 0.05 compared with conventional protocols). Bony structures were rated worse in VMI ± iMAR ( P < 0.05) than in tin prefilter protocols ± iMAR. The DE protocol ± iMAR had the lowest contrast-to-noise ratio ( P < 0.05 compared with iMAR standard) and the highest image noise ( P < 0.05 compared with iMAR VMI). The iMAR reduced MA very efficiently. Conclusions: When considering MAR and image quality, the iMAR Sn 150 kV protocol performed best overall in CT images with OI. The iMAR generated new artifacts that impaired image quality. The DECT/VMI reduced MA best, but experienced from a lack of resolution of bony fine structures. Abstract : Supplemental digital content is available in the text.