Fabrication of an In-house Phantom for Evaluation of Metal Artifact Reduction in Computed Tomography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32628/IJSRST24114131Keywords:
Artifact, CT number, Noise, MARAbstract
Purpose: This study aims to fabricate an in-house phantom for evaluating effectiveness of a metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithm in computed tomography (CT) images. Methods: The in-house phantom was made from polyester-resin (PESR) with methyl ethyl ketone peroxide (MEKP) as a catalyst. The dimension of the phantom was 160 mm in diameter and 50 mm in length with seven insert holes ranging from 10 to 20 mm. The titanium representing a metal implant and calcium carbonate representing the bone were inserted into the holes of the phantom. The phantom was scanned using a GE Revolution Apex CT scanner, slice thickness of 1.25 mm, and tube current of 200 and 370 mA. Images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP) and MAR algorithm for reducing metal artifact. Artifact evaluation was characterized by changing in CT number and image noise. Results: Titanium material increases metal artifact in the in-house phantom. Metal artifact from titanium decreases CT number around 5% and increases noise level around 60%. MAR implementation can reduce metal artifacts, which is indicated by an increase in the CT number around 0.7% and a decrease in noise level around 30%. Conclusion: The in-house phantom for evaluating MAR algorithm was successfully developed. The presence of titanium increases metal artifacts, which is characterized by a decrease in the CT number and an increase in noise level in the area around the titanium. It is found that the MAR succeeded in reducing metal artifacts.
Downloads
References
Vellarackal AJ, Kaim AH. Metal artefact reduction of different alloys with dual energy computed tomography (DECT). Scientific Reports. 2021;11(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81600-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-81600-1
Hsieh J, Flohr T. Computed tomography recent history and future perspectives. Journal of Medical Imaging. 2021;8(05). doi:https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.8.5.052109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.8.5.052109
Anam C, Budi WS, Adi K, Sutanto H, Haryanto F, Ali MH, Fujibuchi T, Dougherty G. Assessment of patient dose and noise level of clinical CT images: automated measurements. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2019;39:783–793. doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ab23cc DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ab23cc
Selles M, Jochen van Osch, Maas M, Boomsma M, Ruud Wellenberg. Advances in metal artifact reduction in CT images: A review of traditional and novel metal artifact reduction techniques. European Journal of Radiology. 2024;170:111276-111276. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111276 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2023.111276
Kohyama S, Yoshii Y, Okamoto Y, Nakajima T. Advances in Bone Joint Imaging-Metal Artifact Reduction. Diagnostics. 2022;12(12):3079. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12123079 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12123079
Sharma S, Kaushal A, Patel S, Kumar V, Prakash M, Mandeep D. Methods to address metal artifacts in post-processed CT images – A do-it-yourself guide for orthopedic surgeons. Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma. 2021;20:101493. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101493 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101493
Andersson KM, Nowik P, Persliden J, Thunberg P, Norrman E. Metal artefact reduction in CT imaging of hip prostheses—an evaluation of commercial techniques provided by four vendors. The British Journal of Radiology. 2015;88(1052):20140473. doi:https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20140473 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20140473
Chae HD, Hong SH, Shin M, Choi JY, Yoo HJ. Combined use of virtual monochromatic images and projection-based metal artifact reduction methods in evaluation of total knee arthroplasty. European Radiology. 2020;30(10):5298-5307. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06932-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06932-4
Kim S, Lim SW, Choi WK. Evaluation of the effects of differences in metal artifact type and location on image quality in computed tomography scans. Journal of Medical Physics. 2023;48(1):80-80. doi:https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_87_22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jmp.jmp_87_22
Conti D, Fabio Baruffaldi, Paolo Erani, Festa A, Durante S, Santoro M. Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Applications to Reduce Metal Artifacts in Hip Prostheses: A Phantom Study. Diagnostics. 2022;13(1):50-50. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010050 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13010050
Ohira S, Kanayama N, Wada K, et al. How Well Does Dual-Energy Computed Tomography with Metal Artifact Reduction Software Improve Image Quality and Quantify Computed Tomography Number and Iodine Concentration? Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography. 2018;42(4):655-660. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/rct.0000000000000735 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0000000000000735
Medeiros Oliveira Ramos S, Thomas S, Bárbara Torres Berdeguez M, Vasconcellos de Sá L, Augusto Lopes de Souza S. Anthropomorphic Phantoms - Potential for More Studies and Training in Radiology. International Journal of Radiology & Radiation Therapy. 2017;2(4). doi:https://doi.org/10.15406/ijrrt.2017.02.00033 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15406/ijrrt.2017.02.00033
Hoy CFO, Naguib HE, Paul N. Fabrication and control of CT number through polymeric composites based on coronary plaque CT phantom applications. Journal of Medical Imaging. 2016;3(1):016001. doi:https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jmi.3.1.016001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JMI.3.1.016001
Winslow JF, Hyer DE, Fisher RF, Tien CJ, Hintenlang DE. Construction of anthropomorphic phantoms for use in dosimetry studies. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2009;10(3):195-204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2986 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2986
Mann KS, Murat Kurudirek, Sidhu GS. Verification of dosimetric materials to be used as tissue-substitutes in radiological diagnosis. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. 2011;70(4):681-691. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.12.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2011.12.008
Hilmawati R, Sutanto H, Anam C, Arifin Z, Asiah RH, Soedarsono JW. Development of a head CT dose index (CTDI) phantom based on polyester resin and methyl ethyl ketone peroxide (MEKP): a preliminary study. Journal of Radiological Protection. 2020;40(2):544-553. doi:https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ab81a6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ab81a6
Mani P, Gupta AK, Krishnamoorthy S. Comparative study of epoxy and polyester resin-based polymer concretes. International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives. 1987;7(3):157-163. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-7496(87)90071-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0143-7496(87)90071-6
Fatichah LN, Anam C, Sutanto H, Ariij Naufal, Rukmana DA, Dougherty G. Identification of the computed tomography dose index for tube voltage variations in a polyester-resin phantom. Applied Radiation and Isotopes. 2023;192:110605-110605. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2022.110605 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2022.110605
Trevisan F, Calignano F, Aversa A, et al. Additive manufacturing of titanium alloys in the biomedical field: processes, properties and applications. Journal of Applied Biomaterials & Functional Materials. 2017;16(2):57-67. doi:https://doi.org/10.5301/jabfm.5000371 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5301/jabfm.5000371
Thiruchitrambalam M, Rao PN, Chinka SSB, Kumar RS, Islam MJ, Kumar BA. Study of the analysis of the corrosion resistance of Ti6Al4V and CoCrMo metallic alloys. Int J Veh Struct Syst. 2024;16(2):164-169. doi: https://doi.org/10.4273/ijvss.16.2.06.
Amini I, Akhlaghi P, Sarbakhsh P. Construction and verification of a physical chest phantom from suitable tissue equivalent materials for computed tomography examinations. Radiation Physics and Chemistry. 2018;150:51-57. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.04.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.04.020
Toia GV, Mileto A, Wang CL, Sahani DV. Quantitative dual-energy CT techniques in the abdomen. Abdominal Radiology. Published online September 1, 2021. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03266-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-021-03266-7
Ghasemi Shayan R, Oladghaffari M, Sajjadian F, Fazel Ghaziyani M. Image Quality and Dose Comparison of Single-Energy CT (SECT) and Dual-Energy CT (DECT). Radiology Research and Practice. 2020;2020:1-11. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1403957 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1403957
Katsura M, Sato J, Akahane M, Kunimatsu A, Abe O. Current and Novel Techniques for Metal Artifact Reduction at CT: Practical Guide for Radiologists. RadioGraphics. 2018;38(2):450-461. doi:https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2018170102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2018170102
Barreto I, Pepin E, Davis I, et al. Comparison of metal artifact reduction using single-energy CT and dual-energy CT with various metallic implants in cadavers. European Journal of Radiology. 2020;133:109357. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109357 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109357
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
