Comparison of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) polychromatic and monochromatic images with and without iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm in patients with dental implants.

BACKGROUND

Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and iterative metal artifact reduction (iMAR) algorithms are valuable tools for reducing metal artifacts. Different parameters of these technologies and their combination can achieve different performance. This study compared various polychromatic and monochromatic images obtained via DECT with and without using iMAR algorithm to reduce artifacts in patients with dental implants.

METHODS

This study included 30 patients with dental implants who underwent DECT for head and neck imaging. The computed tomography (CT) image sets comprised DECT polychromatic image sets [dual-energy (DE) polychromatic] that linearly blended 100 kV and tin-filtered 140 kV images using composition ratios of -1, -0.6, -0.3, 0, and 0.6, and virtual monochromatic images (DE monochromatic) at 90, 110, 130, 150, and 170 keV. These image sets were obtained with and without using iMAR, resulting in a total of 20 image sets. For subjective analysis, metal artifacts and image quality were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. For objective analysis, CT attenuation, standard deviation (SD), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and artifact index (AI) were evaluated. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed based on implant size.

RESULTS

In the subjective evaluation, iMAR + DE polychromatic (-0.3) images exhibited the lowest metal artifact scores [median (interquartile range): 2 (2-3)]. iMAR + DE monochromatic (110 keV) images demonstrated optimal image quality scores [median (interquartile range): 2 (2-3)]. In the objective evaluation, none of the images demonstrated a significant difference in the CNR, except polychromatic images with a composition of -1 and 0.6. iMAR + DE polychromatic (0) exhibited the lowest AI [median (interquartile range): 8.7 (5.9-14.5)]. There was no significant difference between the two groups with different implant sizes for the techniques combined with iMAR (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

iMAR + DE polychromatic (-0.3 and 0) and iMAR + DE monochromatic (110 keV) images exhibited better image quality and substantial metal artifact reduction (MAR) compared with the other image sets. The performance of the techniques combined with iMAR was not affected by the size of the implant.