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

BACKGROUND

Artifacts from metallic implants can hinder image interpretation in computed tomography (CT). Image quality can be improved using metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of a MAR algorithm on image quality of CT examinations in comparison to filtered back projection (FBP) in patients with hip prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-two patients with 25 hip prostheses who underwent clinical abdominopelvic CT on a 64-row CT were included in this retrospective study. Axial images were reconstructed with FBP and five increasing MAR levels (M30-34). Objective artifact strength (OAS) (SI-SI) was assessed by region of interest (ROI) measurements in position of the strongest artifact (SI) and in an osseous structure without artifact (SI) (in Hounsfield units [HU]). Two independent readers evaluated subjective image quality regarding metallic hardware, delineation of bone, adjacent muscle, and pelvic organs on a 5-point scale (1, non-diagnostic; 5, excellent image quality). Artifacts in the near field, far field, and newly induced artifacts due to the MAR technique were analyzed.

RESULTS

OAS values were: M34: 243.8 ± 155.4 HU; M33: 294.3 ± 197.8 HU; M32: 340.5 ± 210.1 HU; M31: 393.6 ± 225.2 HU; M30: 446.8 ± 224.2 HU and FBP: 528.9 ± 227.7 HU. OAS values were significantly lower for M32-34 compared to FBP (P < 0.01). For overall subjective image quality, results were: FBP, 2.0 ± 0.2; M30, 2.3 ± 0.8; M31, 2.6 ± 0.5; M32, 3.0 ± 0.6; M33, 3.5 ± 0.6; and M34, 3.8 ± 0.4 (P < 0.001 for M30-M34 vs. FBP, respectively). Increasing MAR levels resulted in new artifacts in 17% of reconstructions.

CONCLUSION

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.