Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 3/2019

01-03-2019 | Musculoskeletal

Comparison of radiographs, tomosynthesis and CT with metal artifact reduction for the detection of hip prosthetic loosening

Authors: Romain Gillet, Pedro Teixeira, Chloé Bonarelli, Henry Coudane, François Sirveaux, Mathias Louis, Alain Blum

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the diagnostic performance of digital tomosynthesis (DTS) for the diagnosis of hip prosthesis loosening (PL) compared with conventional radiographs and CT with metal artifact reduction (CT-MAR).

Methods

Forty-nine patients with painful hip prosthesis were prospectively included and underwent anteroposterior and lateral radiographs, anteroposterior DTS and CT-MAR of the hip. This study was approved by the local ethics committee, and all patients signed an informed consent form. Images were evaluated independently by two radiologists. Periprosthetic radiolucent lines wider than 2 mm found in two or more Gruen or De Lee and Charnley zones were considered diagnostic of PL. All cases of PL were confirmed surgically. Patients with a stable radiological follow-up for at least 1 year with an alternative cause for the symptoms or with no surgical evidence of PL were considered PL negative.

Results

There were 21 cases of PL, 9 unilateral and 12 bilateral. For both the acetabular and femoral sides, DTS had a specificity for PL detection similar to that of conventional radiographs and CT-MAR (98.5–100%, 96.9%–100% and 96.9–95.4% respectively for both readers) and a sensitivity similar to conventional radiographs (39.9–45.4% versus 33.3–51.5% for both readers) but lower than CT-MAR (84.85% for both readers). The interobserver agreement was 0.84 for CT-MAR, 0.53 for DTS and 0.39 for conventional radiographs.

Conclusion

DTS has a similar diagnostic performance to radiographs for the diagnosis of PL with a better interobserver agreement. The sensitivity however remains lower than that of CT-MAR.

Key Points

• Plain radiograph is still the first imaging step when hip prosthesis loosening is suspected.
• Interobserver agreement is better with digital tomosynthesis than radiographs.
• Sensitivity of CT with state-of-the-art metal artifact reduction is superior to that of digital tomosynthesis.
Literature
1.
Nemes S, Gordon M, Rogmark C, Rolfson O (2014) Projections of total hip replacement in Sweden from 2013 to 2030. Acta Orthop 85:238–243CrossRef
2.
Labek G, Thaler M, Janda W, Agreiter M, Stöckl B (2011) Revision rates after total joint replacement: cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:293–297
3.
Delaunay C, Hamadouche M, Girard J, Duhamel A; SoFCOT Group (2013) What are the causes for failures of primary hip arthroplasties in France? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3863–3869
4.
Duffy PJ, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP (2005) Evaluation of patients with pain following total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2565–2575
5.
Patel AR, Sweeney P, Ochenjele G, Wixson R, Stulberg SD, Puri LM (2015) Radiographically silent loosening of the acetabular component in hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 44:406–410
6.
Eklund K, Jonsson K, Lindblom G et al (2004) Are digital images good enough? A comparative study of conventional film-screen vs digital radiographs on printed images of total hip replacement. Eur Radiol 14:865–869CrossRef
7.
Claus AM, Engh CA Jr, Sychterz CJ, Xenos JS, Orishimo KF, Engh CA Sr (2003) Radiographic definition of pelvic osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1519–1526
8.
Blum A, Meyer JB, Raymond A et al (2016) CT of hip prosthesis: new techniques and new paradigms. Diagn Interv Imaging 97:725–733
9.
Gondim Teixeira PA, Meyer JB, Baumann C et al (2014) Total hip prosthesis CT with single-energy projection-based metallic artifact reduction: impact on the visualization of specific periprosthetic soft tissue structures. Skeletal Radiol 43:1237–1246
10.
Roth TD, Maertz NA, Parr JA, Buckwalter KA, Choplin RH (2012) CT of the hip prosthesis: appearance of components, fixation, and complications. Radiographics 32:1089–1107
11.
Chen Z, Pandit H, Taylor A, Gill H, Murray D, Ostlere S (2011) Metal-on-metal hip resurfacings—a radiological perspective. Eur Radiol 21:485–491
12.
Laukamp KR, Lennartz S, Neuhaus VF et al (2018) CT metal artifacts in patients with total hip replacements: for artifact reduction monoenergetic reconstructions and post-processing algorithms are both efficient but not similar. Eur Radiol. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00330-018-5414-2
13.
Lee YH, Park KK, Song HT, Kim S, Suh JS (2012) Metal artefact reduction in gemstone spectral imaging dual-energy CT with and without metal artefact reduction software. Eur Radiol 22:1331–1340
14.
West AT, Marshall TJ, Bearcroft PW (2009) CT of the musculoskeletal system: what is left is the days of MRI? Eur Radiol 19:152–164CrossRef
15.
Agten CA, Sutter R, Dora C, Pfirrmann CW (2017) MR imaging of soft tissue alterations after total hip arthroplasty: comparison of classic surgical approaches. Eur Radiol 27:1312–1321CrossRef
16.
Kretzschmar M, Nardo L, Han MM et al (2015) Metal artefact suppression at 3 T MRI: comparison of MAVRIC-SL with conventional fast spin echo sequences in patients with hip joint arthroplasty. Eur Radiol 25:2403–2411CrossRef
17.
Fritz J, Lurie B, Miller TT, Potter HG (2014) MR imaging of hip arthroplasty implants. Radiographics 34:E106–E132CrossRef
18.
Fritz J, Lurie B, Miller TT (2013) Imaging of hip arthroplasty. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 17:316–327CrossRef
19.
Blum A, Noël A, Regent D, Villani N, Gillet R, Gondim Teixeira P (2018) Tomosynthesis in musculoskeletal pathology. Diagn Interv Imaging 99:423–441
20.
Machida H, Yuhara T, Tamura M et al (2016) Whole-body clinical applications of digital tomosynthesis. Radiographics 36:735–750CrossRef
21.
Geijer M, Gunnlaugsson E, Götestrand S, Weber L, Geijer H (2017) Tomosynthesis of the thoracic spine: added value in diagnosing vertebral fractures in the elderly. Eur Radiol 27:491–497
22.
Gomi T, Hirano H (2008) Clinical potential of digital linear tomosynthesis imaging of total joint arthroplasty. J Digit Imaging 21:312–322CrossRef
23.
Gomi T, Hirano H, Umeda T (2009) Evaluation of the X-ray digital linear tomosynthesis reconstruction processing method for metal artifact reduction. Comput Med Imaging Graph 33:267–274CrossRef
24.
Gomi T, Sakai R, Goto M, Watanabe Y, Takeda T, Umeda T (2016) Comparison of reconstruction algorithms for decreasing the exposure dose during digital tomosynthesis for arthroplasty: a phantom study. J Digit Imaging 29:488–495
25.
26.
Göthlin JH, Geijer M (2013) The utility of digital linear tomosynthesis imaging of total hip joint arthroplasty with suspicion of loosening: a prospective study in 40 patients. Biomed Res Int 2013:1–6CrossRef
27.
Tang H, Yang D, Guo S et al (2016) Digital tomosynthesis with metal artifact reduction for assessing cementless hip arthroplasty: a diagnostic cohort study of 48 patients. Skeletal Radiol 45:1523–1532CrossRef
28.
Chang YB, Xu D, Zamyatin AA (2012) Metal artifact reduction algorithm for single energy and dual energy CT scans. In: 2012 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record (NSS/MIC), Anaheim, CA, 2012, pp. 3426–3429
29.
Christner JA, Kofler JM, McCollough CH (2010) Estimating effective dose for ct using dose–length product compared with using organ doses: consequences of adopting International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 103 or dual-energy scanning. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:881–889CrossRef
30.
DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 20–32
31.
Gruen TA, McNeice G, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–2723
32.
Abrahams JM, Kim YS, Callary SA et al (2017) The diagnostic performance of radiographic criteria to detect aseptic acetabular component loosening after revision total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 99-B:458–464CrossRef
33.
Wu T, Moore RH, Rafferty EA, Kopans DB (2004) A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis. Med Phys 31:2636–2647CrossRef
34.
Mermuys K, De Geeter F, Bacher K et al (2010) Digital Tomosynthesis in the detection of urolithiasis: diagnostic performance and dosimetry compared with digital radiography with MDCT as the reference standard. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:161–167CrossRef
35.
Ha AS, Lee AY, Hippe DS, Chou SH, Chew FS (2015) Digital tomosynthesis to evaluate fracture healing: prospective comparison with radiography and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:136–141
36.
Simoni P, Gérard L, Kaiser MJ et al (2015) Use of Tomosynthesis for detection of bone erosions of the foot in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with radiography and CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 205:364–370CrossRef
37.
Canella C, Philippe P, Pansini V, Salleron J, Flipo RM, Cotten A (2011) Use of tomosynthesis for erosion evaluation in rheumatoid arthritic hands and wrists. Radiology 258:199–205
38.
Ottenin MA, Jacquot A, Grospretre O et al (2012) Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of tomosynthesis in fractures of the wrist. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:180–186
39.
Becker AS, Martini K, Higashigaito K, Guggenberger R, Andreisek G, Frauenfelder T (2017) Dose reduction in tomosynthesis of the wrist. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208:159–164
40.
Machida H, Yuhara T, Tamura M et al (2012) Radiation dose of digital tomosynthesis for sinonasal examination: comparison with multi-detector CT. Eur J Radiol 81:1140–1145CrossRef
41.
Lacout A, Thariat J, Hajjam ME, Marcy PY (2013) Insight into osteo-articular digital tomosynthesis: a pictorial essay: osteo-articular digital tomosynthesis. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 57:45–49CrossRef
42.
Lombard C, Gervaise A, Villani N et al (2018) The impact of dose reduction in quantitative kinematic CT of ankle joints using a full model-based iterative reconstruction algorithm: a cadaveric study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 210:396–403CrossRef
43.
Gervaise A, Osemont B, Lecocq S et al (2012) CT image quality improvement using adaptive iterative dose reduction with wide-volume acquisition on 320-detector CT. Eur Radiol 22:295–301CrossRef
44.
Gervaise A, Teixeira P, Villani N, Lecocq S, Louis M, Blum A (2013) CT dose optimisation and reduction in osteoarticular disease. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:371–388
45.
Gervaise A, Osemont B, Louis M, Lecocq S, Teixeira P, Blum A (2014) Standard dose versus low-dose abdominal and pelvic CT: comparison between filtered back projection versus adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D. Diagn Interv Imaging 95:47–53
46.
Kim YS, Abrahams JM, Callary SA et al (2017) Proximal translation of > 1 mm within the first two years of revision total hip arthroplasty correctly predicts whether or not an acetabular component is loose in 80% of cases: a case-control study with confirmed intra-operative outcomes. Bone Joint J 99-B:465–474CrossRef
47.
Hayashi D, Xu L, Gusenburg J et al (2014) Reliability of semiquantitative assessment of osteophytes and subchondral cysts on tomosynthesis images by radiologists with different levels of expertise. Diagn Interv Radiol 20:353–359CrossRef
48.
Tucker L, Gilbert FJ, Astley SM et al (2017) Does reader performance with digital breast tomosynthesis vary according to experience with two-dimensional mammography? Radiology 283:371–380CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of radiographs, tomosynthesis and CT with metal artifact reduction for the detection of hip prosthetic loosening
Authors
Romain Gillet
Pedro Teixeira
Chloé Bonarelli
Henry Coudane
François Sirveaux
Mathias Louis
Alain Blum
Publication date
01-03-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5717-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

European Radiology 3/2019 Go to the issue

Chest

Automated MR-based lung volume segmentation in population-based whole-body MR imaging: correlation with clinical characteristics, pulmonary function testing and obstructive lung disease

Breast

A randomized controlled trial of digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in population-based screening in Bergen: interim analysis of performance indicators from the To-Be trial

Musculoskeletal

Combining non-contrast and dual-energy CT improves diagnosis of early gout

Oncology

Radiomics analysis of multiparametric MRI for prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer

Magnetic Resonance

Added value of mean and entropy of apparent diffusion coefficient values for evaluating histologic phenotypes of invasive ductal breast cancer with MR imaging

Magnetic Resonance

Decreased cerebral blood flow and improved cognitive function in patients with end-stage renal disease after peritoneal dialysis: An arterial spin-labelling study