Benefits of iterative metal artifact reduction and dual-energy CT towards mitigating artifact in the setting of total shoulder prostheses

Abstract

Objective

To determine the utility of iterative metal artifact reduction and 130 keV dual-energy virtual monoenergetic images to improve bone and soft tissue visualization in CT scans affected by metal artifacts.

Material and methods

Thirteen females and 6 males with a history of total shoulder prosthesis who underwent dual-energy shoulder CT were included. Four sets of images were reconstructed for each patient: (1) original polychromatic kV images reconstructed with weighted filtered back projection; (2) polychromatic kV images with iterative metal artifact reduction; (3) 130 keV dual-energy virtual monoenergetic; (4) combined iterative metal artifact reduction and 130 keV dual-energy virtual monoenergetic. Three readers blindly reviewed all image sets and graded the extent of artifact and image quality.

Results

Mean artifact score and median overall image quality score were better in 130 keV dual-energy virtual monoenergetic with iterative metal artifact reduction compared with those in original polychromatic kV images (3.02 vs 4.28, P < 0.001 and 3.00 vs 4.33, P < 0.001, respectively). The median difference in CT numbers between regions affected by artifacts and normal regions was lowest in 130 keV dual-energy virtual monoenergetic with iterative metal artifact reduction compared with that in original polychromatic kV images (72.28 vs 252.08, P < 0.001 for bony regions and 15.09 vs 324.38, P < 0.001 for soft tissue).

Conclusion

In patients with metal artifacts due to shoulder replacement surgery, the use of dual-energy monoenergetic images and iterative metal artifact reduction reconstruction significantly improves both subjective and objective indicators of image quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. 1.

    Neer CS, Brown TH Jr, McLaughlin HL. Fracture of the neck of the humerus with dislocation of the head fragment. Am J Surg. 1953;85(3):252–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Palsis JA, Simpson KN, Matthews JH, Traven S, Eichinger JK, Friedman RJ. Current trends in the use of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. Orthopedics. 2018;41(3):e416–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang YQ, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93a(24):2249–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Gupta A, Subhas N, Primak AN, Nittka M, Liu K. Metal artifact reduction: standard and advanced magnetic resonance and computed tomography techniques. Radiol Clin N Am. 2015;53(3):531–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Gregory T, Hansen U, Khanna M, Mutchler C, Urien S, Amis AA, et al. A CT scan protocol for the detection of radiographic loosening of the glenoid component after total shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2014;85(1):91–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Lin DJ, Wong TT, Kazam JK. Shoulder arthroplasty, from indications to complications: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiographics. 2016;36(1):192–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics. 2004;24(6):1679–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Khodarahmi I, Haroun RR, Lee M, Fung GSK, Fuld MK, Schon LC, et al. Metal artifact reduction computed tomography of arthroplasty implants: effects of combined modeled iterative reconstruction and dual-energy virtual monoenergetic extrapolation at higher photon energies. Investig Radiol. 2018;53(12):728–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Mangold S, Gatidis S, Luz O, Konig B, Schabel C, Bongers MN, et al. Single-source dual-energy computed tomography: use of monoenergetic extrapolation for a reduction of metal artifacts. Investig Radiol. 2014;49(12):788–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Subhas N, Polster JM, Obuchowski NA, Primak AN, Dong FF, Herts BR, et al. Imaging of arthroplasties: improved image quality and lesion detection with iterative metal artifact reduction, a new CT metal artifact reduction technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207(2):378–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Shim E, Kang Y, Ahn JM, Lee E, Lee JW, Oh JH, et al. Metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants (O-MAR): usefulness in CT evaluation of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;209(4):860–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Higashigaito K, Angst F, Runge VM, Alkadhi H, Donati OF. Metal artifact reduction in pelvic computed tomography with hip prostheses: comparison of virtual monoenergetic extrapolations from dual-energy computed tomography and an iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm in a phantom study. Investig Radiol. 2015;50(12):828–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kotsenas AL, Michalak GJ, DeLone DR, Diehn FE, Grant K, Halaweish AF, et al. CT metal artifact reduction in the spine: can an iterative reconstruction technique improve visualization? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(11):2184–90.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Diehn FE, Michalak GJ, DeLone DR, Kotsenas AL, Lindell EP, Campeau NG, et al. CT dental artifact: comparison of an iterative metal artifact reduction technique with weighted filtered back-projection. Acta Radiol Open. 2017;6(11):2058460117743279.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Yoo HJ, Hong SH, Chung BM, Moon SJ, Choi JY, Chae HD, et al. Metal artifact reduction in virtual monoenergetic spectral dual-energy CT of patients with metallic orthopedic implants in the distal radius. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;211(5):1083–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Bongers MN, Schabel C, Thomas C, Raupach R, Notohamiprodjo M, Nikolaou K, et al. Comparison and combination of dual-energy- and iterative-based metal artefact reduction on hip prosthesis and dental implants. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0143584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Michael Bruesewitz, R.T.(R) and Scott Boeke, D.O. for their assistance in data collection.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joel G. Fletcher.

Ethics declarations

Institutional review board approval was obtained for this study, which was in compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 15 kb).

ESM 2

(DOCX 15 kb).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohammadinejad, P., Baffour, F.I., Adkins, M.C. et al. Benefits of iterative metal artifact reduction and dual-energy CT towards mitigating artifact in the setting of total shoulder prostheses. Skeletal Radiol (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03528-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • CT (computed tomography)
  • Dual-energy CT
  • Metal artifact
  • Metal artifact reduction
  • Shoulder prosthesis