SU-F-J-175: Evaluation of Metal Artifact Reduction Algorithms in Computed Tomography and Their Application to Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning
- Baylor Scott & White Health, Temple, TX (United States)
Purpose: High-Z (metal) implants in CT scans cause significant streak-like artifacts in the reconstructed dataset. This results in both inaccurate CT Hounsfield units for the tissue as well as obscuration of the target and organs at risk (OARs) for radiation therapy planning. Herein we analyze two metal artifact reduction algorithms: GE’s Smart MAR and a Metal Deletion Technique (MDT) for geometric and Hounsfield Unit (HU) accuracy. Methods: A CT-to-electron density phantom, with multiple inserts of various densities and a custom Cerrobend insert (Zeff=76.8), is utilized in this continuing study. The phantom is scanned without metal (baseline) and again with the metal insert. Using one set of projection data, reconstructed CT volumes are created with filtered-back-projection (FBP) and the MAR and the MDT algorithms. Regions-of-Interest (ROIs) are evaluated for each insert for HU accuracy; the metal insert’s Full-Width-Half-Maximum (FWHM) is used to evaluate the geometric accuracy. Streak severity is quantified with an HU error metric over the phantom volume. Results: The original FBP reconstruction has a Root-Mean-Square-Error (RMSE) of 57.55 HU (STD=29.19, range=−145.8 to +79.2) compared to baseline. The MAR reconstruction has a RMSE of 20.98 HU (STD=13.92, range=−18.3 to +61.7). The MDT reconstruction has a RMSE of 10.05 HU (STD=10.5, range=−14.8 to +18.6). FWHM for baseline=162.05; FBP=161.84 (−0.13%); MAR=162.36 (+0.19%); MDT=162.99 (+0.58%). Streak severity metric for FBP=19.73 (22.659% bad pixels); MAR=8.743 (9.538% bad); MDT=4.899 (5.303% bad). Conclusion: Image quality, in terms of HU accuracy, in the presence of high-Z metal objects in CT scans is improved by metal artifact reduction reconstruction algorithms. The MDT algorithm had the highest HU value accuracy (RMSE=10.05 HU) and best streak severity metric, but scored the worst in terms of geometric accuracy. Qualitatively, the MAR and MDT algorithms increased detectability of inserts, although there is a loss of in-plane resolution near the metallic insert.
- OSTI ID:
- 22634772
- Journal Information:
- Medical Physics, Vol. 43, Issue 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); ISSN 0094-2405
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
WE-D-18A-01: Evaluation of Three Commercial Metal Artifact Reduction Methods for CT Simulations in Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning
SU-E-I-13: Evaluation of Metal Artifact Reduction (MAR) Software On Computed Tomography (CT) Images