Cargando…

Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?

PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm activated at different times during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition on the magnitude of artifacts generated by a zirconium implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volumes were obtaine...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fontenele, Rocharles C., Nascimento, Eduarda H.L., Santaella, Gustavo M., Freitas, Deborah Q.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078406/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32206617
http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.23
_version_ 1783507614538137600
author Fontenele, Rocharles C.
Nascimento, Eduarda H.L.
Santaella, Gustavo M.
Freitas, Deborah Q.
author_facet Fontenele, Rocharles C.
Nascimento, Eduarda H.L.
Santaella, Gustavo M.
Freitas, Deborah Q.
author_sort Fontenele, Rocharles C.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm activated at different times during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition on the magnitude of artifacts generated by a zirconium implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volumes were obtained with and without a zirconium implant in a human mandible, using the OP300 Maxio unit. Three modes were tested: without MAR, with MAR activated after acquisition, and with MAR activated before acquisition. Artifacts were assessed in terms of the standard deviation (SD) of gray values and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 6 regions of interest with different distances (10 to 35 mm, from the nearest to the farthest) and angulations (70° to 135°) from the implant region. RESULTS: In the acquisitions without MAR, the regions closer to the implant (10 and 15 mm) had a higher SD and lower CNR than the farther regions. When MAR was activated (before or after), SD values did not differ among the regions (P>0.05). The region closest to the implant presented a significantly lower CNR in the acquisitions without MAR than when MAR was activated after the acquisition; however, activating MAR before the acquisition did not yield significant differences from either of the other conditions. CONCLUSION: Both modes of MAR activation were effective in decreasing the magnitude of CBCT artifacts, especially when the effects of the artifacts were more noticeable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7078406
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70784062020-03-23 Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images? Fontenele, Rocharles C. Nascimento, Eduarda H.L. Santaella, Gustavo M. Freitas, Deborah Q. Imaging Sci Dent Original Article PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the effectiveness of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm activated at different times during cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition on the magnitude of artifacts generated by a zirconium implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Volumes were obtained with and without a zirconium implant in a human mandible, using the OP300 Maxio unit. Three modes were tested: without MAR, with MAR activated after acquisition, and with MAR activated before acquisition. Artifacts were assessed in terms of the standard deviation (SD) of gray values and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in 6 regions of interest with different distances (10 to 35 mm, from the nearest to the farthest) and angulations (70° to 135°) from the implant region. RESULTS: In the acquisitions without MAR, the regions closer to the implant (10 and 15 mm) had a higher SD and lower CNR than the farther regions. When MAR was activated (before or after), SD values did not differ among the regions (P>0.05). The region closest to the implant presented a significantly lower CNR in the acquisitions without MAR than when MAR was activated after the acquisition; however, activating MAR before the acquisition did not yield significant differences from either of the other conditions. CONCLUSION: Both modes of MAR activation were effective in decreasing the magnitude of CBCT artifacts, especially when the effects of the artifacts were more noticeable. Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology 2020-03 2020-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7078406/ /pubmed/32206617 http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.23 Text en Copyright © 2020 by Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Fontenele, Rocharles C.
Nascimento, Eduarda H.L.
Santaella, Gustavo M.
Freitas, Deborah Q.
Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title_full Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title_fullStr Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title_full_unstemmed Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title_short Does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in CBCT images?
title_sort does the metal artifact reduction algorithm activation mode influence the magnitude of artifacts in cbct images?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078406/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32206617
http://dx.doi.org/10.5624/isd.2020.50.1.23
work_keys_str_mv AT fontenelerocharlesc doesthemetalartifactreductionalgorithmactivationmodeinfluencethemagnitudeofartifactsincbctimages
AT nascimentoeduardahl doesthemetalartifactreductionalgorithmactivationmodeinfluencethemagnitudeofartifactsincbctimages
AT santaellagustavom doesthemetalartifactreductionalgorithmactivationmodeinfluencethemagnitudeofartifactsincbctimages
AT freitasdeborahq doesthemetalartifactreductionalgorithmactivationmodeinfluencethemagnitudeofartifactsincbctimages