Cargando…
Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom
BACKGROUND: Metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques can improve metal artifacts of computed tomography (CT) images. OBJECTIVE: This work focused on conducting a quantitative analysis to compare the effectiveness of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants (hip implant, spina...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
IOS Press
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32364160 http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/THC-209028 |
_version_ | 1783560717032488960 |
---|---|
author | Chou, Ryan Chi, Hung-Yi Lin, Yi-Hung Ying, Liu-Kuo Chao, Yu-Ju Lin, Cheng-Hsun |
author_facet | Chou, Ryan Chi, Hung-Yi Lin, Yi-Hung Ying, Liu-Kuo Chao, Yu-Ju Lin, Cheng-Hsun |
author_sort | Chou, Ryan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques can improve metal artifacts of computed tomography (CT) images. OBJECTIVE: This work focused on conducting a quantitative analysis to compare the effectiveness of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants (hip implant, spinal implant, and dental filling) with a self-made acrylic phantom. METHODS: A cylindrical phantom was made from acrylic with a groove in the middle, and then three types of metal implants were placed in the groove. The phantom was scanned by four CT scanners and four commercialized MAR techniques were used to analyze the images. The techniques used were single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR, Canon), smart metal artifact reduction software (Smart-MAR, GE), iterative metal artifact reduction (IMAR, Siemens), and metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants (OMAR, Philips). Quantitative analysis methods included objective and subjective analysis. RESULTS: The expected value of SEMAR, Smart-MAR, IMAR, and OMAR were 36.6, 37.8, 5.0, and 2.3, respectively. SEMAR and Smart-MAR achieved optimal results. CONCLUSION: This study successfully evaluated the effects of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants in a phantom. All MAR techniques effectively reduced metal artifacts, but the effect was not significant with dental fillings due to high-density material. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7369061 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | IOS Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73690612020-07-22 Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom Chou, Ryan Chi, Hung-Yi Lin, Yi-Hung Ying, Liu-Kuo Chao, Yu-Ju Lin, Cheng-Hsun Technol Health Care Research Article BACKGROUND: Metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques can improve metal artifacts of computed tomography (CT) images. OBJECTIVE: This work focused on conducting a quantitative analysis to compare the effectiveness of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants (hip implant, spinal implant, and dental filling) with a self-made acrylic phantom. METHODS: A cylindrical phantom was made from acrylic with a groove in the middle, and then three types of metal implants were placed in the groove. The phantom was scanned by four CT scanners and four commercialized MAR techniques were used to analyze the images. The techniques used were single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR, Canon), smart metal artifact reduction software (Smart-MAR, GE), iterative metal artifact reduction (IMAR, Siemens), and metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants (OMAR, Philips). Quantitative analysis methods included objective and subjective analysis. RESULTS: The expected value of SEMAR, Smart-MAR, IMAR, and OMAR were 36.6, 37.8, 5.0, and 2.3, respectively. SEMAR and Smart-MAR achieved optimal results. CONCLUSION: This study successfully evaluated the effects of four commercial MAR techniques on three types of metal implants in a phantom. All MAR techniques effectively reduced metal artifacts, but the effect was not significant with dental fillings due to high-density material. IOS Press 2020-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7369061/ /pubmed/32364160 http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/THC-209028 Text en © 2020 – IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is published online with Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (CC BY-NC 4.0). |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chou, Ryan Chi, Hung-Yi Lin, Yi-Hung Ying, Liu-Kuo Chao, Yu-Ju Lin, Cheng-Hsun Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title | Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title_full | Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title_fullStr | Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title_short | Comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for CT imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
title_sort | comparison of quantitative measurements of four manufacturer’s metal artifact reduction techniques for ct imaging with a self-made acrylic phantom |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7369061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32364160 http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/THC-209028 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chouryan comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom AT chihungyi comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom AT linyihung comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom AT yingliukuo comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom AT chaoyuju comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom AT linchenghsun comparisonofquantitativemeasurementsoffourmanufacturersmetalartifactreductiontechniquesforctimagingwithaselfmadeacrylicphantom |