A Comparison and Evaluation of Two Commercially Available Metal Artifact Reduction Applications
Mitsuharu Osawa1, Naotoshi Fujita2, Shuji Koyama3
1Central Radiology Department, Aichi Medical University Hospital, Nagakute, Aichi, Japan.
Journal of Neuroendovascular Therapy
|August 21, 2024
Summary
Metal artifact reduction (MAR) effectiveness differs between angiography systems A and B. System A showed approximately 45% reduction at 8300 concentration, while system B showed 40% at 6000 concentration, impacting clinical choices.
Area of Science:
- Medical Imaging
- Radiology
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- Angiography systems A and B feature metal artifact reduction (MAR) applications.
- Understanding MAR performance is vital for endovascular treatments using either system.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the artifact reduction efficacy of MAR in angiography systems A and B.
- To identify and clarify the differences in MAR performance between the two systems.
Main Methods:
- An artifact evaluation phantom was constructed using a water phantom and iodine contrast medium.
- Images were acquired, MAR processing was applied, and quantitative artifact evaluation was performed using Gumbel distribution analysis.
Main Results:
- MAR reduction effects were approximately 45% for system A (at 8300 concentration) and 40% for system B (at 6000 concentration).
- The MAR reduction trends varied between the devices based on contrast agent concentration.
Conclusions:
- Knowledge of MAR characteristics for both systems is crucial for clinical procedures using medium concentrations (3000-5000) of agents like n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate and Onyx.
- Consideration of alternative systems may be necessary depending on MAR performance and clinical requirements.
