These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Reduction of metal artifacts in patients with total hip arthroplasty with slice-encoding metal artifact correction and view-angle tilting MR imaging.
    Author: Sutter R, Ulbrich EJ, Jellus V, Nittka M, Pfirrmann CW.
    Journal: Radiology; 2012 Oct; 265(1):204-14. PubMed ID: 22923720.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the new "warp" sequence (slice-encoding metal artifact correction [SEMAC], view-angle tilting [VAT], and increased bandwidth) for the reduction of both through-plane and in-plane magnetic resonance (MR) artifacts with current optimized MR sequences in patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board issued a waiver for this study. Forty patients with THA were prospectively included. SEMAC, VAT, and increased bandwidth were applied by using the warp turbo-spin-echo sequence at 1.5 T. Coronal short tau inversion-recovery (STIR)-warp and transverse T1-weighted warp (hereafter, T1-warp) images, as well as standard coronal STIR and transverse T1-weighted sequence images optimized with high bandwidth (STIR-hiBW and T1-hiBW), were acquired. Fifteen additional patients were examined to compare the T1-warp and T1-hiBW sequence with an identical matrix size. Signal void was quantified. Qualitative criteria (distinction of anatomic structures, blurring, and noise) were assessed on a five-point scale (1, no artifacts; 5, not visible due to severe artifacts) by two readers. Abnormal imaging findings were recorded. Quantitative data were analyzed with a t test and qualitative data with a Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: Signal void around the acetabular component was smaller for STIR-warp than STIR-hiBW images (21.6 cm2 vs 42.4 cm2; P=.0001), and for T1-warp than T1-hiBW images (17.6 cm2 vs 20.2 cm2; P=.0001). Anatomic distinction was better on STIR-warp compared with STIR-hiBW images (1.9-2.8 vs 3.6-4.6; P=.0001), and on T1-warp compared with T1-hiBW images (1.3-2.8 vs 1.8-3.2; P<.002). Distortion, blurring, and noise were lower with warp sequences than with the standard sequences (P=.0001). Almost half of the abnormal imaging findings were missed on STIR-hiBW compared with STIR-warp images (55 vs 105 findings; P=.0001), while T1-hiBW was similar to T1-warp imaging (50 vs 55 findings; P=.06). CONCLUSION: STIR-warp and T1-warp sequences were significantly better according to quantitative and qualitative image criteria, but a clinically relevant artifact reduction was only present for STIR images.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]