Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multidetector CT

Radiographics

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 791-803

  Lee, Mi Jung ^a   Kim, Sungjun ^a,b   Lee, Sung Ah ^c   Song, Ho Taek ^a   Huh, Yong Min ^a   Kim, Dae Hong ^d   Seung, Hwan Han ^e   Suh, Jin Suck ^a  

^a Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b Hanyang University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^c Seoul Medical Center   (South Korea)

^d Korea Basic Science Institute (KBSI)   (South Korea)

^e Ajou University School of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

METAL;

ARTIFACT; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; REVIEW;

ARTIFACTS; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; METALS; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 34249857538     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.273065087     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. White LM, Buckwalter KA. Technical considerations: CT and MR imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2002;6:5-17.
2. Mitchell DG, Cohen MS. Transverse magnetization and T2 contrast. In: Mitchell DG, Cohen MS, eds. MRI principles. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 2000; 35-47.
3. Guermazi A, Miaux Y, Zaim S, Peterfy CG, White D, Genant HK. Metallic artefacts in MR imaging: effects of main field orientation and strength. Clin Radiol 2003;58:322-328.
4. Eggers G, Rieker M, Kress B, Fiebach J, Dickhaus H, Hassfeld S. Artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging caused by dental material. MAGMA 2005;18:103-111.
5. Viano AM, Gronemeyer SA, Haliloglu M, Hoffer FA. Improved MR imaging for patients with metallic implants. Magn Reson Imaging 2000;18: 287-295.
6. Ludeke KM, Roschmann P, Tischler R. Susceptibility artefacts in NMR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 1985;3:329-343.
7. Cho ZH, Ro YM. Reduction of susceptibility artifact in gradient-echo imaging. Magn Reson Med 1992;23:193-200.
8. White LM, Kim JK, Mehta M, et al. Complications of total hip arthroplasty: MR imaging - initial experience. Radiology 2000;215:254-262.
9. Suh JS, Jeong EK, Shin KH, et al. Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998;171:1207-1213.
10. Ganapathi M, Joseph G, Savage R, Jones AR, Timms B, Lyons K. MRI susceptibility artefacts related to scaphoid screws: the effect of screw type, screw orientation and imaging parameters. J Hand Surg [Br] 2002;27:165-170.
11. Williams DF. Titanium as a metal for implantation. II. Biological properties and clinical applications. J Med Eng Technol 1977;1:266-270.
12. Ladd ME, Erhart P, Debatin JF, Romanowski BJ, Boesiger P, McKinnon GC. Biopsy needle susceptibility artifacts. Magn Reson Med 1996;36:646-651.
13. Camacho CR, Plewes DB, Henkelman RM. Nonsusceptibility artifacts due to metallic objects in MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995;5:75-88.
14. Tormanen J, Tervonen O, Koivula A, Junila J, Suramo I. Image technique optimization in MR imaging of a titanium alloy joint prosthesis. J Magn Reson Imaging 1996;6:805-811.
15. Tartaglino LM, Flanders AE, Vinitski S, Friedman DP. Metallic artifacts on MR images of the postoperative spine: reduction with fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 1994;190:565-569.
16. Petersilge CA, Lewin JS, Duerk JL, Yoo JU, Ghaneyem AJ. Optimizing imaging parameters for MR evaluation of the spine with titanium pedicle screws. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996;166:1213-1218.
17. Alanen A, Bondestam S, Komu M. Artifacts in MR imaging caused by small quantities of powdered iron. Acta Radiol 1995;36:92-95.
18. Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. RadioGraphics 2004;24:1679-1691.
19. Yazdi M, Gingras L, Beaulieu L. An adaptive approach to metal artifact reduction in helical computed tomography for radiation therapy treatment planning: experimental and clinical studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2005;62:1224-1231.
20. Haramati N, Staron RB, Mazel-Sperling K, et al. CT scans through metal scanning technique versus hardware composition. Comput Med Imaging Graph 1994;18:429-434.
21. Wang G, Frei T, Vannier MW. Fast iterative algorithm for metal artifact reduction in x-ray CT. Acad Radiol 2000;7:607-614.
22. Link TM, Berning W, Scherf S, et al. CT of metal implants: reduction of artifacts using an extended CT scale technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000;24:165-172.
23. Reiner BI, Siegel EL, Hooper FJ. Accuracy of interpretation of CT scans: comparing PACS monitor displays and hard-copy images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1407-1410.