Low-dose CT with metal artifact reduction in arthroplasty imaging: a cadaveric and clinical study

Advances in metal artifact reduction in CT images: A review of traditional and novel metal artifact reduction techniques

Metal artifacts degrade CT image quality, hampering clinical assessment. Numerous metal artifact reduction methods are available to improve the image quality of CT images with metal implants. In this review, an overview of traditional methods is provided including the modification of acquisition and reconstruction parameters, projection-based metal artifact reduction techniques (MAR), dual energy CT (DECT) and the combination of these techniques. Furthermore, the additional value and challenges of novel metal artifact reduction techniques that have been introduced over the past years are discussed such as photon counting CT (PCCT) and deep learning based metal artifact reduction techniques.

Combining gantry-free cone-beam computed tomography with iterative metal artefact reduction for surgical follow-up imaging of the appendicular skeleton

PURPOSE

Post-surgical evaluation of osteosynthesis material and adjacent tissue can be challenging in both radiography and cross-sectional imaging. This study investigates the performance of a multi-purpose X-ray scanner with cone-beam CT (CBCT) function and iterative metal artefact reduction capabilities in patients after osteoplasty of the appendicular skeleton.

METHOD

Eighty individuals who underwent both conventional X-ray imaging and CBCT after osteoplasty of the hand/wrist (48), elbow (14), or ankle/foot (18) with the gantry-free twin robotic system were retrospectively enrolled. Radiological reports from clinical routine for both imaging modalities were retrospectively analyzed and compared with consensus expert reading by two musculoskeletal specialists serving as the standard of reference. Findings of screw dislocation or implant loosening, fragment displacement, and delayed healing were compared between X-ray and CBCT reports using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

The median dose-area-product of CBCT and X-ray scans amounted to 27.98 and 0.2 dGy*cm², respectively. Diagnostic accuracy for screw dislocation was superior in CBCT compared to standard radiograms (98.8 % vs 83.8 %; p = 0.002). Implant loosening (98.8 % vs 86.3 %; p = 0.006), fragment displacement (98.8 % vs 85.0 %; p < 0.001), and delayed healing (97.5 % vs 88.8 %; p = 0.016) were also more reliably detected in CBCT. Employing CBCT, postoperative complications were detected with a sensitivity and specificity of at least 95.8 % and 98.1 %, compared to 33.3 % and 92.86 % in radiography.

CONCLUSIONS

With superior accuracy for various osteoplasty-related complications, the CBCT scan mode of a gantry-free twin robotic X-ray system with iterative metal artefact reduction aids post-surgical assessment in the appendicular skeleton.

Validation of a 3D CT imaging method for quantifying implant migration following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

Glenoid component loosening remains a common complication following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA); however, plain radiographs are unable to accurately detect early implant migration. The purpose of this study was to validate the accuracy of a method of postoperative, three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) imaging with metal artifact reduction (MAR) to detect glenoid component migration following anatomic TSA. Tantalum bead markers were inserted into polyethylene glenoid components for implant detection on 3D CT. In-vitro validation was performed using a glenoid component placed into a scapula sawbone and incrementally translated and rotated, with MAR 3D CT acquired at each test position. Accuracy was evaluated by root mean square error (RMSE). In-vivo validation was performed on six patients who underwent anatomic TSA, with two postoperative CT scans acquired in each patient and marker-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) performed on the same days. Glenoid component migration was calculated relative to a scapular coordinate system for both MAR 3D CT and RSA. Accuracy was evaluated by RMSE and paired Student's t-tests. The largest RMSE on in-vitro testing was 0.24 mm in translation and 0.11° in rotation, and on in-vivo testing was 0.47 mm in translation and 1.04° in rotation. There were no significant differences between MAR 3D CT and RSA measurement methods. MAR 3D CT imaging is capable of quantifying glenoid component migration with a high level of accuracy. MAR 3D CT imaging is advantageous over RSA because it is readily available clinically and can also be used to evaluate the implant-bone interface.