Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Sep 16;12(1):15549.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-19978-9.

Metal artifact reduction in ultra-high-resolution cone-beam CT imaging with a twin robotic X-ray system

Affiliations

Metal artifact reduction in ultra-high-resolution cone-beam CT imaging with a twin robotic X-ray system

Andreas Steven Kunz et al. Sci Rep. .

Abstract

Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been shown to be a powerful tool for 3D imaging of the appendicular skeleton, allowing for detailed visualization of bone microarchitecture. This study was designed to compare artifacts in the presence of osteosynthetic implants between CBCT and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) in cadaveric wrist scans. A total of 32 scan protocols with varying tube potential and current were employed: both conventional CBCT and MDCT studies were included with tube voltage ranging from 60 to 140 kVp as well as additional MDCT protocols with dedicated spectral shaping via tin prefiltration. Irrespective of scanner type, all examinations were conducted in ultra-high-resolution (UHR) scan mode. For reconstruction of UHR-CBCT scans an additional iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm was employed, an image correction tool which cannot be used in combination with UHR-MDCT. To compare applied radiation doses between both scanners, the volume computed tomography dose index for a 16 cm phantom (CTDIvol) was evaluated. Images were assessed regarding subjective and objective image quality. Without automatic tube current modulation or tube potential control, radiation doses ranged between 1.3 mGy (with 70 kVp and 50.0 effective mAs) and 75.2 mGy (with 140 kVp and 383.0 effective mAs) in UHR-MDCT. Using the pulsed image acquisition method of the CBCT scanner, CTDIvol ranged between 2.3 mGy (with 60 kVp and 0.6 mean mAs per pulse) and 61.0 mGy (with 133 kVp and 2.5 mean mAs per pulse). In essence, all UHR-CBCT protocols employing a tube potential of 80 kVp or more were found to provide superior overall image quality and artifact reduction compared to UHR-MDCT (all p < .050). Interrater reliability of seven radiologists regarding image quality was substantial for tissue assessment and moderate for artifact assessment with Fleiss kappa of 0.652 (95% confidence interval 0.618-0.686; p < 0.001) and 0.570 (95% confidence interval 0.535-0.606; p < 0.001), respectively. Our results demonstrate that the UHR-CBCT scan mode of a twin robotic X-ray system facilitates excellent visualization of the appendicular skeleton in the presence of metal implants. Achievable image quality and artifact reduction are superior to dose-comparable UHR-MDCT and even MDCT protocols employing spectral shaping with tin prefiltration do not achieve the same level of artifact reduction in adjacent soft tissue.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

J.P.G was funded by the Interdisciplinary Center of Clinical Research Würzburg, Germany [grant number Z-2/CSP-06] and serves as a research consultant for Siemens Healthineers. The Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology receives research funding by Siemens Healthineers. The authors of this manuscript declare no further relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bone image quality and intensity of metal artifacts by palmar plate osteosynthesis in conventional ultra-high-resolution MDCT scan protocols.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bone image quality and intensity of metal artifacts by palmar plate osteosynthesis in ultra-high-resolution CBCT scan protocols.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Region of interest (ROI) placement for objective assessment of metal artifact intensity. Note—A = hyperdense artifacts; B = hypodense artifacts; C = artifact-impaired soft tissue.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Boxplots with signal attenuation in artifacts and artifact-impaired soft tissue. Note—Boxplots (median and 50% of cases within the boxes) illustrate the corrected signal attenuation in Hounsfield units (HU) for hyperdense artifacts, hypodense artifacts and artifact-impaired soft tissue in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) with different levels of tube voltage (kVp = kilovoltage peak).

References

    1. Wellenberg RHH, et al. Metal artifact reduction techniques in musculoskeletal CT-imaging. Eur. J. Radiol. 2018;107:60–69. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.08.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chandrasekar S, et al. Combined dual-energy and single-energy metal artifact reduction techniques versus single-energy techniques alone for lesion detection near an arthroplasty. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2020;215:425–432. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.22084. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bushberg JT. The AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents X-ray interactions. Radiographics. 1998;18:457–468. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.18.2.9536489. - DOI - PubMed
    1. GroßeHokamp N, et al. Artifact reduction from dental implants using virtual monoenergetic reconstructions from novel spectral detector CT. Eur. J. Radiol. 2018;104:136–142. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2018.04.018. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics. 2004;24:1679–1691. doi: 10.1148/rg.246045065. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types