The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants

Philips Healthcare released a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants (O‐MAR). Little information was available about its CT number accuracy. Since CT numbers are used for tissue heterogeneity corrections in external beam radiotherapy treatment planning, we performed a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of applied clinical medical physics 2014-01, Vol.15 (1), p.274-278
Hauptverfasser: Hilgers, Guido, Nuver, Tonnis, Minken, André
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 278
container_issue 1
container_start_page 274
container_title Journal of applied clinical medical physics
container_volume 15
creator Hilgers, Guido
Nuver, Tonnis
Minken, André
description Philips Healthcare released a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants (O‐MAR). Little information was available about its CT number accuracy. Since CT numbers are used for tissue heterogeneity corrections in external beam radiotherapy treatment planning, we performed a phantom study to assess the CT number accuracy of O‐MAR. Two situations were simulated: a patient with a unilateral metallic hip prosthesis and a patient with bilateral metallic hip prostheses. We compared the CT numbers in the O‐MAR reconstructions of the simulations to those in the nonO‐MAR reconstruction and to those in a metal‐free baseline reconstruction. In both simulations, the CT number accuracy of the O‐MAR reconstruction was better than the CT number accuracy of the nonO‐MAR reconstruction. In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the unilateral simulation, all CT numbers were accurate within ±5HU (AAPM criterion). In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the bilateral simulation, CT numbers were found that differed more than ±5HU from the metal‐free baseline values. However, none of these differences were clinically relevant. PACS numbers: 87.57.Q‐, 87.57.cp
doi_str_mv 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4597
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5711242</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2289912606</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6074-46b708e081c23458dcb8d2152cf9dc049df613c97e36d3e62c4fb1b7a219393d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtvEzEUhS0Eom1gzwpZYsMmwa95eINURUCRWnWTri3PnTuJo_F48HiC8u9xm1IVNt3Ylvzdo3vOIeQDZyvOBfuyt-DH1YEXjq9UoatX5JwXolxqzdXrZ-8zcjFNe8Y4r2X9lpwJpYSsC31O_GaHdL2hw-wbjNQCzNHCkYaOWjqEA_YUgvcYwdmeekz5tDG5zkKiEdsZkgsDtf02RJd2nnYh0t7GLdIQ0y6M2Dqgzo-9HdL0jrzpbD_h-8d7Qe6-f9usr5bXtz9-ri-vl1CySi1V2VSsRlZzEFIVdQtN3YrsBjrdAlO67UouQVcoy1ZiKUB1DW8qK7iWWrZyQb6edMe58dgCDina3ozReRuPJlhn_v0Z3M5sw8EUVc41Z7Mgnx8FYvg145SMdxNgn11gmCfDlWZVVWilMvrpP3Qf5jhke0aIOqcvSlZmip0oiGGaInZPy3Bm7rs0D12ahy7NfZd55ONzE08Df8vLQHkCfrsejy8Kmsv1jWCiUvIPDqyu5Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2289912606</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Hilgers, Guido ; Nuver, Tonnis ; Minken, André</creator><creatorcontrib>Hilgers, Guido ; Nuver, Tonnis ; Minken, André</creatorcontrib><description>Philips Healthcare released a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants (O‐MAR). Little information was available about its CT number accuracy. Since CT numbers are used for tissue heterogeneity corrections in external beam radiotherapy treatment planning, we performed a phantom study to assess the CT number accuracy of O‐MAR. Two situations were simulated: a patient with a unilateral metallic hip prosthesis and a patient with bilateral metallic hip prostheses. We compared the CT numbers in the O‐MAR reconstructions of the simulations to those in the nonO‐MAR reconstruction and to those in a metal‐free baseline reconstruction. In both simulations, the CT number accuracy of the O‐MAR reconstruction was better than the CT number accuracy of the nonO‐MAR reconstruction. In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the unilateral simulation, all CT numbers were accurate within ±5HU (AAPM criterion). In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the bilateral simulation, CT numbers were found that differed more than ±5HU from the metal‐free baseline values. However, none of these differences were clinically relevant. PACS numbers: 87.57.Q‐, 87.57.cp</description><identifier>ISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4597</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24423859</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Accuracy ; Algorithms ; Computer Simulation ; CT number accuracy ; Hip Prosthesis ; Humans ; metal artifact reduction ; metallic hip prosthesis ; Metals ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Prostheses ; Prostheses and Implants ; Radiation Oncology Physics ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Standard deviation ; Titanium ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2014-01, Vol.15 (1), p.274-278</ispartof><rights>2014 The Authors.</rights><rights>2014. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6074-46b708e081c23458dcb8d2152cf9dc049df613c97e36d3e62c4fb1b7a219393d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6074-46b708e081c23458dcb8d2152cf9dc049df613c97e36d3e62c4fb1b7a219393d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711242/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711242/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24423859$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hilgers, Guido</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nuver, Tonnis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Minken, André</creatorcontrib><title>The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants</title><title>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</title><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><description>Philips Healthcare released a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants (O‐MAR). Little information was available about its CT number accuracy. Since CT numbers are used for tissue heterogeneity corrections in external beam radiotherapy treatment planning, we performed a phantom study to assess the CT number accuracy of O‐MAR. Two situations were simulated: a patient with a unilateral metallic hip prosthesis and a patient with bilateral metallic hip prostheses. We compared the CT numbers in the O‐MAR reconstructions of the simulations to those in the nonO‐MAR reconstruction and to those in a metal‐free baseline reconstruction. In both simulations, the CT number accuracy of the O‐MAR reconstruction was better than the CT number accuracy of the nonO‐MAR reconstruction. In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the unilateral simulation, all CT numbers were accurate within ±5HU (AAPM criterion). In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the bilateral simulation, CT numbers were found that differed more than ±5HU from the metal‐free baseline values. However, none of these differences were clinically relevant. PACS numbers: 87.57.Q‐, 87.57.cp</description><subject>Accuracy</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>CT number accuracy</subject><subject>Hip Prosthesis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>metal artifact reduction</subject><subject>metallic hip prosthesis</subject><subject>Metals</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Prostheses and Implants</subject><subject>Radiation Oncology Physics</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Standard deviation</subject><subject>Titanium</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>1526-9914</issn><issn>1526-9914</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtvEzEUhS0Eom1gzwpZYsMmwa95eINURUCRWnWTri3PnTuJo_F48HiC8u9xm1IVNt3Ylvzdo3vOIeQDZyvOBfuyt-DH1YEXjq9UoatX5JwXolxqzdXrZ-8zcjFNe8Y4r2X9lpwJpYSsC31O_GaHdL2hw-wbjNQCzNHCkYaOWjqEA_YUgvcYwdmeekz5tDG5zkKiEdsZkgsDtf02RJd2nnYh0t7GLdIQ0y6M2Dqgzo-9HdL0jrzpbD_h-8d7Qe6-f9usr5bXtz9-ri-vl1CySi1V2VSsRlZzEFIVdQtN3YrsBjrdAlO67UouQVcoy1ZiKUB1DW8qK7iWWrZyQb6edMe58dgCDina3ozReRuPJlhn_v0Z3M5sw8EUVc41Z7Mgnx8FYvg145SMdxNgn11gmCfDlWZVVWilMvrpP3Qf5jhke0aIOqcvSlZmip0oiGGaInZPy3Bm7rs0D12ahy7NfZd55ONzE08Df8vLQHkCfrsejy8Kmsv1jWCiUvIPDqyu5Q</recordid><startdate>201401</startdate><enddate>201401</enddate><creator>Hilgers, Guido</creator><creator>Nuver, Tonnis</creator><creator>Minken, André</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201401</creationdate><title>The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants</title><author>Hilgers, Guido ; Nuver, Tonnis ; Minken, André</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c6074-46b708e081c23458dcb8d2152cf9dc049df613c97e36d3e62c4fb1b7a219393d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Accuracy</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>CT number accuracy</topic><topic>Hip Prosthesis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>metal artifact reduction</topic><topic>metallic hip prosthesis</topic><topic>Metals</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Prostheses and Implants</topic><topic>Radiation Oncology Physics</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Standard deviation</topic><topic>Titanium</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hilgers, Guido</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nuver, Tonnis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Minken, André</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hilgers, Guido</au><au>Nuver, Tonnis</au><au>Minken, André</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied clinical medical physics</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><date>2014-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>274</spage><epage>278</epage><pages>274-278</pages><issn>1526-9914</issn><eissn>1526-9914</eissn><abstract>Philips Healthcare released a novel metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants (O‐MAR). Little information was available about its CT number accuracy. Since CT numbers are used for tissue heterogeneity corrections in external beam radiotherapy treatment planning, we performed a phantom study to assess the CT number accuracy of O‐MAR. Two situations were simulated: a patient with a unilateral metallic hip prosthesis and a patient with bilateral metallic hip prostheses. We compared the CT numbers in the O‐MAR reconstructions of the simulations to those in the nonO‐MAR reconstruction and to those in a metal‐free baseline reconstruction. In both simulations, the CT number accuracy of the O‐MAR reconstruction was better than the CT number accuracy of the nonO‐MAR reconstruction. In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the unilateral simulation, all CT numbers were accurate within ±5HU (AAPM criterion). In the O‐MAR reconstruction of the bilateral simulation, CT numbers were found that differed more than ±5HU from the metal‐free baseline values. However, none of these differences were clinically relevant. PACS numbers: 87.57.Q‐, 87.57.cp</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>24423859</pmid><doi>10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4597</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1526-9914
ispartof Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2014-01, Vol.15 (1), p.274-278
issn 1526-9914
1526-9914
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5711242
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Access via Wiley Online Library; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); PubMed Central
subjects Accuracy
Algorithms
Computer Simulation
CT number accuracy
Hip Prosthesis
Humans
metal artifact reduction
metallic hip prosthesis
Metals
Phantoms, Imaging
Prostheses
Prostheses and Implants
Radiation Oncology Physics
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods
Standard deviation
Titanium
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
title The CT number accuracy of a novel commercial metal artifact reduction algorithm for large orthopedic implants
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T11%3A36%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20CT%20number%20accuracy%20of%20a%20novel%20commercial%20metal%20artifact%20reduction%20algorithm%20for%20large%20orthopedic%20implants&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20clinical%20medical%20physics&rft.au=Hilgers,%20Guido&rft.date=2014-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=274&rft.epage=278&rft.pages=274-278&rft.issn=1526-9914&rft.eissn=1526-9914&rft_id=info:doi/10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4597&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2289912606%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2289912606&rft_id=info:pmid/24423859&rfr_iscdi=true