Metal artifact reduction strategies for clinical photon counting computed tomography of total hip arthroplasty: a volumetric quantitative and qualitative phantom study
Roy P. Marcus, Zurich / Switzerland
Author Block: R. P. Marcus, G. C. Feuerriegel, A. A. Marth, D. Nanz, R. Sutter; Zurich/CH
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the impact of various scanning and reconstruction modes on both metal artifact volume and overall image quality in the context of a hip prosthesis phantom, acquired on a first generation clinical photon-counting detector computed tomography (PCCT).
Methods or Background: A total hip prosthesis phantom was scanned on a PCCT (Naeotom Alpha, Siemens Healthineers) employing four distinct modes at 140 kV and constant dose of 7 mGy: Quantumplus (Q+), UHR-Quantumplus (UHR-Q+), QuantumSn (Q-Sn) and UHR-QuantumSn (UHR-Q-Sn); Sn = tin filter. Polychromatic and virtual monoenergetic images (VMI) were reconstructed with and without iterative metal artifact reduction (iMAR, Siemens Healthineers). Artifacts were quantified using a 3D printing software and image quality was evaluated by two radiologists.
Results or Findings: Tin filter reduced artifact volume in polychromatic reconstructions by 14% (298 ml (Q-Sn) vs 347 ml (Q+) and 310 ml (UHR-Q-Sn) vs 360 ml (UHR-Q+)). iMAR reduced the metal artifact volume by 46 – 57% with UHR-Q+ images achieving the lowest artifact volume at 150 ml. In VMI, the smallest total artifact volume was quantified at 130 keV with Q+ (150 ml) and UHR-Q+ (164 ml), at 120 keV with Q-Sn (169 ml) and UHR-Q-Sn (172 ml). iMAR reduced artifact volume in VMI: 130 ml in Q+ (150 keV), 140 ml in UHR-Q+ (160 keV), 134 ml in Q-Sn (150 keV) and 140 ml (UHR Q-Sn at 190 keV). Best subjective image quality was achieved for VMI Q+ with iMAR (65 keV), polychromatic UHR-Q+ with iMAR, VMI Q-Sn with iMAR (100 keV), polychromatic Q-Sn with iMAR, VMI UHR-Q-Sn (100 keV) and polychromatic UHR Q-Sn.
Conclusion: VMI or polychromatic images using tin filter, UHR and iMAR achieve the strongest artifact reduction and best image quality.
Limitations: This was a single phantom size study.
Funding for this study: This study received in house funding.
Has your study been approved by an ethics committee? Not applicable
Ethics committee - additional information: This was a phantom study, hence no ethics committee approval was needed.