Semi-supervised spatial-frequency transformer for metal artifact reduction in maxillofacial CT and evaluation with
Yuanlin Li1, Chenglong Ma2, Zilong Li2
1Department of Oral Maxillofacial Head and Neck Oncology, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, College of Stomatology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, National Center for Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, Shanghai Key Laboratory of Stomatology & Shanghai Research Institute of Stomatology, Shanghai 200011, China.
Purpose:
To develop a semi-supervised domain adaptation technique for metal artifact reduction with a spatial-frequency transformer (SFTrans) model (Semi-SFTrans), and to quantitatively compare its performance with supervised models (Sup-SFTrans and ResUNet) and traditional linear interpolation MAR method (LI) in oral and maxillofacial CT.
Methods:
Supervised models, including Sup-SFTrans and a state-of-the-art model termed ResUNet, were trained with paired simulated CT images, while semi-supervised model, Semi-SFTrans, was trained with both paired simulated and unpaired clinical CT images. For evaluation on the simulated data, we calculated Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio (PSNR) and Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM) on the images corrected by four methods: LI, ResUNet, Sup-SFTrans, and Semi-SFTrans. For evaluation on the clinical data, we collected twenty-two clinical cases with real metal artifacts, and the corresponding intraoral scan data. Three radiologists visually assessed the severity of artifacts using Likert scales on the original, Sup-SFTrans-corrected, and Semi-SFTrans-corrected images. Quantitative MAR evaluation was conducted by measuring Mean Hounsfield Unit (HU) values, standard deviations, and Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNRs) across Regions of Interest (ROIs) such as the tongue, bilateral buccal, lips, and bilateral masseter muscles, using paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Further, teeth integrity in the corrected images was assessed by comparing teeth segmentation results from the corrected images against the ground-truth segmentation derived from registered intraoral scan data, using Dice Score and Hausdorff Distance.
Results:
Sup-SFTrans outperformed LI, ResUNet and Semi-SFTrans on the simulated dataset. Visual assessments from the radiologists showed that average scores were (2.02 ± 0.91) for original CT, (4.46 ± 0.51) for Semi-SFTrans CT, and (3.64 ± 0.90) for Sup-SFTrans CT, with intra correlation coefficients (ICCs)＞0.8 of all groups and p < 0.001 between groups. On soft tissue, both Semi-SFTrans and Sup-SFTrans significantly reduced metal artifacts in tongue (p < 0.001), lips, bilateral buccal regions, and masseter muscle areas (p < 0.05). Semi-SFTrans achieved superior metal artifact reduction than Sup-SFTrans in all ROIs (p < 0.001). SNR results indicated significant differences between Semi-SFTrans and Sup-SFTrans in tongue (p = 0.0391), bilateral buccal (p = 0.0067), lips (p = 0.0208), and bilateral masseter muscle areas (p = 0.0031). Notably, Semi-SFTrans demonstrated better teeth integrity preservation than Sup-SFTrans (Dice Score: p < 0.001; Hausdorff Distance: p = 0.0022).
Conclusion:
The semi-supervised MAR model, Semi-SFTrans, demonstrated superior metal artifact reduction performance over supervised counterparts in real dental CT images.
