Quantifying image distortion of orthopedic materials in magnetic resonance imaging

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 610-618

  Koff, Matthew F ^a   Shah, Parina ^a   Koch, Kevin M ^b   Potter, Hollis G ^a  

^a HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY   (United States)

^b GE HEALTHCARE   (United States)

Author keywords

artifact; metal; Susc eptibility

Indexed keywords

CHROMIUM; COBALT; STAINLESS STEEL; TITANIUM; ULTRA HIGH MOLECULAR WEIGHT POLYETHYLENE;

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTRON SPIN RESONANCE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISTORTION; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; MULTIACQUISITION VARIABLE RESONANCE IMAGE COMBINATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS;

ARTIFACT; METAL; SUSCEPTIBILITY;

ALGORITHMS; ARTIFACTS; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; JOINT PROSTHESIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; METALS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WHOLE BODY IMAGING;

EID: 84883423627     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: 15222586     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.23991     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. HCUPnet, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. http://hcupnet.ahrq.gov, Aug 2012.
2. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M,. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 894: 780-785.
3. Gupta SK, Chu A, Ranawat AS, Slamin J, Ranawat CS,. Osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007; 226: 787-799.
4. Resnick D,. Osteoporosis. Bone and joint imaging. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1996. 491 p.
5. Walde TA, Weiland DE, Leung SB, et al. Comparison of CT, MRI, and radiographs in assessing pelvic osteolysis: a cadaveric study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005 437: 138-144.
6. Solomon LB, Stamenkov RB, Macdonald AJ, et al. Imaging periprosthetic osteolysis around total knee arthroplasties using a human cadaver model. J Arthroplasty 2012; 27: 1069-1074.
7. Barrett JF, Keat N,. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics 2004; 246: 1679-1691.
8. Joemai RM, de Bruin PW, Veldkamp WJ, Geleijns J,. Metal artifact reduction for CT: development, implementation, and clinical comparison of a generic and a scanner-specific technique. Med Phys 2012; 392: 1125-1132.
9. Butts K, Pauly JM, Gold GE,. Reduction of blurring in view angle tilting MRI. Magn Reson Med 2005; 532: 418-424.
10. Cho ZH, Kim DJ, Kim YK,. Total inhomogeneity correction including chemical shifts and susceptibility by view angle tilting. Med Phys 1988; 151: 7-11.
11. Beyea SD, Balcom BJ, Prado PJ, et al. Relaxation time mapping of short T2* nuclei with single-point imaging (SPI) methods. J Magn Reson 1998; 1351: 156-164.
12. Balcom BJ, Macgregor RP, Beyea SD, Green DP, Armstrong RL, Bremner TW,. Single-Point Ramped Imaging with T1 Enhancement (SPRITE). J Magn Reson A 1996; 1231: 131-134.
13. Macovski A, Conolly S,. Novel approaches to low-cost MRI. Magn Reson Med 1993; 302: 221-230.
14. Rahmer J, Bornert P, Dries SP,. Assessment of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using 3D ultrashort echo-time MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009; 292: 443-448.
15. Carl M, Koch K, Du J,. MR imaging near metal with undersampled 3D radial UTE-MAVRIC sequences. Magn Reson Med 2012 [Epub ahead of print].
16. Zhou R, Idiyatullin D, Moeller S, et al. SWIFT detection of SPIO-labeled stem cells grafted in the myocardium. Magn Reson Med 2010; 635: 1154-1161.
17. Koch KM, Lorbiecki JE, Hinks RS, King KF,. A multispectral three-dimensional acquisition technique for imaging near metal implants. Magn Reson Med 2009; 612: 381-390.
18. Lu W, Pauly KB, Gold GE, Pauly JM, Hargreaves BA,. SEMAC: slice encoding for metal artifact correction in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2009; 621: 66-76.
19. Koch KM, Hargreaves BA, Pauly KB, Chen W, Gold GE, King KF,. Magnetic resonance imaging near metal implants. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010; 324: 773-787.
20. Chen CA, Chen W, Goodman SB, et al. New MR imaging methods for metallic implants in the knee: artifact correction and clinical impact. J Magn Reson Imaging 2011; 335: 1121-1127.
21. Hayter CL, Koff MF, Shah P, Koch KM, Miller TT, Potter HG,. MRI after arthroplasty: comparison of MAVRIC and conventional fast spin-echo techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 1973: W405-W411.
22. Hayter CL, Potter HG, Su EP,. Imaging of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. Orthop Clin North Am 2011; 422: 195-205, viii.
23. Augustiny N, von Schulthess GK, Meier D, Bosiger P,. MR imaging of large nonferromagnetic metallic implants at 1.5 T. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1987; 114: 678-683.
24. Eustace S, Jara H, Goldberg R, et al. A comparison of conventional spin-echo and turbo spin-echo imaging of soft tissues adjacent to orthopedic hardware. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1998; 1702: 455-458.
25. Chang SD, Lee MJ, Munk PL, Janzen DL, MacKay A, Xiang QS,. MRI of spinal hardware: comparison of conventional T1-weighted sequence with a new metal artifact reduction sequence. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 304: 213-218.
26. Lyons CJ, Betz RR, Mesgarzadeh M, Revesz G, Bonakdarpour A, Clancy M,. The effect of magnetic resonance imaging on metal spine implants. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1989; 147: 670-672.
27. 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; 1715: 1207-1213.
28. 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; 65: 805-811.
29. Lee MJ, Kim S, Lee SA, et al. Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. Radiographics 2007; 273: 791-803.
30. Laakman RW, Kaufman B, Han JS, et al. MR imaging in patients with metallic implants. Radiology 1985; 1573: 711-714.
31. 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; 584: 322-328.
32. White LM, Kim JK, Mehta M, et al. Complications of total hip arthroplasty: MR imaging-initial experience. Radiology 2000; 2151: 254-262.
33. Lee MJ, Janzen DL, Munk PL, MacKay A, Xiang QS, McGowen A,. Quantitative assessment of an MR technique for reducing metal artifact: application to spin-echo imaging in a phantom. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 307: 398-401.
34. Bland JM, Altman DG,. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 18476: 307-310.
35. Frazzini VI, Kagetsu NJ, Johnson CE, Destian S,. Internally stabilized spine: optimal choice of frequency-encoding gradient direction during MR imaging minimizes susceptibility artifact from titanium vertebral body screws. Radiology 1997; 2041: 268-272.
36. Weiland DE, Walde TA, Leung SB, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of periprosthetic acetabular osteolysis: a cadaveric study. J Orthop Res 2005; 234: 713-719.
37. Schenck JF,. The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys 1996; 236: 815-850.
38. Bartusetk K, Dokoupil Z, Gescheidtova E,. Magnetic field mapping around metal implants using an asymmetric spin-echo MRI sequence. Meas Sci Technol 2006; 17: 3293-3300.
39. Koch KM, Brau AC, Chen W, et al. Imaging near metal with a MAVRIC-SEMAC hybrid. Magn Reson Med 2011; 651: 71-82.