Cargando…

Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling

BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of metal artifact reduction techniques in 3D printing by evaluating image quality and segmentation time in both phantom and patient studies with dental restorations and/or other metal implants. An acrylic denture apparatus (Kilgore Typodent, Kilgore International, Co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Marcus, Roy P., Morris, Jonathan M., Matsumoto, Jane M., Alexander, Amy E., Halaweish, Ahmed F., Kelly, James A, Fletcher, Joel G., McCollough, Cynthia H., Leng, Shuai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6036666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30050982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41205-017-0013-4
_version_ 1783338194660491264
author Marcus, Roy P.
Morris, Jonathan M.
Matsumoto, Jane M.
Alexander, Amy E.
Halaweish, Ahmed F.
Kelly, James A
Fletcher, Joel G.
McCollough, Cynthia H.
Leng, Shuai
author_facet Marcus, Roy P.
Morris, Jonathan M.
Matsumoto, Jane M.
Alexander, Amy E.
Halaweish, Ahmed F.
Kelly, James A
Fletcher, Joel G.
McCollough, Cynthia H.
Leng, Shuai
author_sort Marcus, Roy P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of metal artifact reduction techniques in 3D printing by evaluating image quality and segmentation time in both phantom and patient studies with dental restorations and/or other metal implants. An acrylic denture apparatus (Kilgore Typodent, Kilgore International, Coldwater, MI) was set in a 20 cm water phantom and scanned on a single-source CT scanner with gantry tilting capacity (SOMATOM Edge, Siemens Healthcare, Forchheim, Germany) under 5 scenerios: (1) Baseline acquisition at 120 kV with no gantry tilt, no jaw spacer, (2) acquisition at 140 kV, (3) acquisition with a gantry tilt at 15°, (4) acquisition with a non-radiopaque jaw spacer and (5) acquisition with a jaw spacer and a gantry tilt at 15°. All acquisitions were reconstructed both with and without a dedicated iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm (MAR). Patients referred for a head-and-neck exam were included into the study. Acquisitions were performed on the same scanner with 120 kV and the images were reconstructed with and without iterative MAR. Segmentation was performed on a dedicated workstation (Materialise Interactive Medical Image Control Systems; Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium) to quantify volume of metal artifact and segmentation time. RESULTS: In the phantom study, the use of gantry tilt, jaw spacer and increased tube voltage showed no benefit in time or artifact volume reduction. However the jaw spacer allowed easier separation of the upper and lower jaw and a better display of the teeth. The use of dedicated iterative MAR significantly reduced the metal artifact volume and processing time. Same observations were made for the four patients included into the study. CONCLUSION: The use of dedicated iterative MAR and jaw spacer substantially reduced metal artifacts in the head-and-neck CT acquisitions, hence allowing a faster 3D segmentation workflow.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6036666
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60366662018-07-24 Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling Marcus, Roy P. Morris, Jonathan M. Matsumoto, Jane M. Alexander, Amy E. Halaweish, Ahmed F. Kelly, James A Fletcher, Joel G. McCollough, Cynthia H. Leng, Shuai 3D Print Med Research BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of metal artifact reduction techniques in 3D printing by evaluating image quality and segmentation time in both phantom and patient studies with dental restorations and/or other metal implants. An acrylic denture apparatus (Kilgore Typodent, Kilgore International, Coldwater, MI) was set in a 20 cm water phantom and scanned on a single-source CT scanner with gantry tilting capacity (SOMATOM Edge, Siemens Healthcare, Forchheim, Germany) under 5 scenerios: (1) Baseline acquisition at 120 kV with no gantry tilt, no jaw spacer, (2) acquisition at 140 kV, (3) acquisition with a gantry tilt at 15°, (4) acquisition with a non-radiopaque jaw spacer and (5) acquisition with a jaw spacer and a gantry tilt at 15°. All acquisitions were reconstructed both with and without a dedicated iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm (MAR). Patients referred for a head-and-neck exam were included into the study. Acquisitions were performed on the same scanner with 120 kV and the images were reconstructed with and without iterative MAR. Segmentation was performed on a dedicated workstation (Materialise Interactive Medical Image Control Systems; Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium) to quantify volume of metal artifact and segmentation time. RESULTS: In the phantom study, the use of gantry tilt, jaw spacer and increased tube voltage showed no benefit in time or artifact volume reduction. However the jaw spacer allowed easier separation of the upper and lower jaw and a better display of the teeth. The use of dedicated iterative MAR significantly reduced the metal artifact volume and processing time. Same observations were made for the four patients included into the study. CONCLUSION: The use of dedicated iterative MAR and jaw spacer substantially reduced metal artifacts in the head-and-neck CT acquisitions, hence allowing a faster 3D segmentation workflow. Springer International Publishing 2017-03-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6036666/ /pubmed/30050982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41205-017-0013-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Research
Marcus, Roy P.
Morris, Jonathan M.
Matsumoto, Jane M.
Alexander, Amy E.
Halaweish, Ahmed F.
Kelly, James A
Fletcher, Joel G.
McCollough, Cynthia H.
Leng, Shuai
Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title_full Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title_fullStr Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title_short Implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
title_sort implementation of iterative metal artifact reduction in the pre-planning-procedure of three-dimensional physical modeling
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6036666/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30050982
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41205-017-0013-4
work_keys_str_mv AT marcusroyp implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT morrisjonathanm implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT matsumotojanem implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT alexanderamye implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT halaweishahmedf implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT kellyjamesa implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT fletcherjoelg implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT mccolloughcynthiah implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling
AT lengshuai implementationofiterativemetalartifactreductioninthepreplanningprocedureofthreedimensionalphysicalmodeling