A Comparison and Evaluation of Two Commercially Available Metal Artifact Reduction Applications.

OBJECTIVE

The angiography systems A (A) and B (B), both incorporated at our hospital, are equipped with metal artifact reduction (MAR) applications. In clinical practice, it is crucial to understand the characteristics of MAR in both systems given that endovascular treatments are occasionally administered with both. In this study, we compared the artifact reduction effects of MAR on equipment A and B and clarified the differences between the two systems.

METHODS

An artifact evaluation phantom was created using a cylindrical water phantom and an iodine contrast medium. The phantom was imaged, MAR processing was performed on the obtained images, and an isotropic quantitative evaluation of artifacts was performed by extreme value statistical analysis using the Gumbel distribution.

RESULTS

The MAR reduction effects were approximately 45% and 40% for equipment A and B at concentrations of 8300 and 6000, respectively. The MAR reduction effect in both devices exhibited different trends depending on the concentration.

CONCLUSION

In clinical procedures that make use of absorbents in medium concentrations of approximately 3000-5000, such as n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate and Onyx, it is necessary to understand the MAR characteristics of both devices and consider the use of alternative devices as an option.