Top

Published in:

01-06-2009 | Original Article

Metal-related artifacts in instrumented spine. Techniques for reducing artifacts in CT and MRI: state of the art

Authors: P. Stradiotti, A. Curti, G. Castellazzi, A. Zerbi

Published in: European Spine Journal | Special Issue 1/2009

Abstract

The projectional nature of radiogram limits its amount of information about the instrumented spine. MRI and CT imaging can be more helpful, using cross-sectional view. However, the presence of metal-related artifacts at both conventional CT and MRI imaging can obscure relevant anatomy and disease. We reviewed the literature about overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopaedic implants at high-field strength MRI imaging and multi-detector CT. The evolution of multichannel CT has made available new techniques that can help minimizing the severe beam-hardening artifacts. The presence of artifacts at CT from metal hardware is related to image reconstruction algorithm (filter), tube current (in mA), X-ray kilovolt peak, pitch, hardware composition, geometry (shape), and location. MRI imaging has been used safely in patients with orthopaedic metallic implants because most of these implants do not have ferromagnetic properties and have been fixed into position. However, on MRI imaging metallic implants may produce geometric distortion, the so-called susceptibility artifact. In conclusion, although 140 kV and high milliamperage second exposures are recommended for imaging patients with hardware, caution should always be exercised, particularly in children, young adults, and patients undergoing multiple examinations. MRI artifacts can be minimized by positioning optimally and correctly the examined anatomy part with metallic implants in the magnet and by choosing fast spin-echo sequences, and in some cases also STIR sequences, with an anterior to posterior frequency-encoding direction and the smallest voxel size.

White LM, Buckwalter KA (2002) Technical considerations: CT and MR imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 6:5–17PubMedCrossRef

Barrett JF, Keat N (2004) Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. RadioGraphics 24:1679–1691PubMedCrossRef

Yazdi M, Gingras L, Beaulieu L (2005) An adaptive approach to metal artifact reduction in helical computed tomography for radiation therapy treatment planning: experimental and clinical studies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 62:1224–1231PubMed

Lee MF, Kim S, Lee SA et al (2007) Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength mr imaging and multidetector CT. RadioGraphics 27:791–803PubMedCrossRef

Douglas-Akinwande AC, Buckwalter KA, Rydberg J et al (2006) Multichannel CT: evaluating the spine in postoperative patients with orthopaedic hardware. RadioGraphics 26:S97–S110PubMedCrossRef

Robertson DD, Weiss PJ, Fishman EK et al (1988) Evaluation of CT techniques for reducing artifacts in the presence of metallic orthopaedic implants. J Comput Assist Tomogr 12:236–241PubMedCrossRef

White LM, Buckwalter KA (2002) Technical considerations: CT and MR imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 6:5–17PubMedCrossRef

Robertson DD, Magid D, Poss R, Fishman EK et al (1989) Enhanced computed tomographic techniques for the evaluation of total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 4:271–276PubMedCrossRef

Haramati N, Staron RB, Mazel-Sperling K et al (1994) CT scans through metal scanning technique versus hardware composition. Comput Med Imaging Graph 18:429–434PubMedCrossRef

10.

Wang JC, Yu WD, Sandhu HS et al (1998) A comparison of magnetic resonance and computed tomographic image quality after the implantation of tantalum and titanium spinal instrumentation. Spine 23:1684–1688PubMedCrossRef

11.

Ohashi K, El-Khoury GY, Bennett DL et al (2005) Orthopedic hardware complication diagnosed with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 237:570–577PubMedCrossRef

12.

Lorenzen M, Wedegartner U, Weber C et al (2005) Clinical relevance of multislice CT of the spine after osteosynthesis. Rofo 177(11):1540–1544PubMed

13.

Schroder RJ, Noor J, Pflugmacher R et al (2004) Short-term CT findings after osteosynthesis of fractures of the vertebral spine. Rofo 176(5):694–703PubMed

14.

Viano AM, Gronemeyer SA, Haliloglu M et al (2000) Improved MR imaging for patients with metallic implants. Magn Reson Imaging 18:287–295PubMedCrossRef

15.

Ludeke KM, Roschmann P, Tischler R (1985) Susceptibility artefacts in NMR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 3:329–343PubMedCrossRef

16.

Harris CA, White LM (2006) Metal artifact reduction in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Orthop Clin N Am 37:349–359CrossRef

17.

Hassfeld S (2005) Artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging caused by dental material. MAGMA 18:103–111PubMedCrossRef

18.

Suh JS, Jeong EK, Shin KH et al (1998) Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1207–1213PubMed

19.

Ganapathi M, Joseph J, Savage R et al (2002) MRI susceptibility artefacts related to scaphoid screws: effect of screw type, screw orientation and imaging parameters. J Hand Surg Br 27:165–170PubMedCrossRef

20.

Guermazi A, Miaux Y, Zaim S et al (2003) Metallic artefacts in MR imaging: effects of main field orientation and strength. Clin Radiol 58:322–328PubMedCrossRef

21.

Mueller PR, Stark DD, Simeone JF et al (1986) MR guided aspiration biopsy: needle design and clinical trials. Radiology 161:605–609PubMed

22.

Wendt RE, Wicott MR, Nitz W et al (1988) MR imaging of susceptibility-induced magnetic field inhomogeneities. Radiology 168:837–841PubMed

23.

White LM, Kim JK, Mehta M et al (2000) Complication of total hip arthroplasty: MR imaging initial experience. Radiology 215:254–262PubMed

24.

Port JD, Pomper MG (2000) Quantification and minimization of magnetic susceptibility artifacts on GRE images. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23:958–964CrossRef

25.

Peterslige CA, Lewin JS, Duerk JL et al (1996) Optimizing imaging parameters for MR evaluation of the spine with titanium pedicle screws. AJR Am J Roentgenol 166:1213–1218

26.

Bakker CJG, Bhagwandien R, Moerland MA et al (1993) Susceptibility artifacts in 2DFT spin-echo imaging: the cylinder model revisited. Magn Reson Imaging 11:539–548PubMedCrossRef

27.

Schenck JF (1996) The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys 23:815–850PubMedCrossRef

28.

Frazzini VI, Kagetsu Nk, Johnson CE et al (1997) Internally stabilized spine: optimal choice of frequency-encoding gradient direction during MR imaging minimizes susceptibility artifact from titanium vertebral body screws. Radiology 204:268–272PubMed

29.

Tartaglino LM, Flanders AE, Vitinski S et al (1994) Metallic artifacts on MR images of the postoperative spine: reduction with fast spin-echo techniques. Radiology 190:565–569PubMed

30.

Hilfiker P, Zanetti M, Debatin JF et al (1995) Fast spinecho inversion-recovery imaging versus fast spin echo imaging in bone marrow abnormalities. Invest Radiol 30:110–114PubMedCrossRef

31.

Czerny C, Krestan C, Imhof H et al (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging of the postoperative hip. Top Magn Reson Imag 10:214–220CrossRef

32.

Mitchell DG, Cohen MS (2000) Transverse magnetization and T2 contrast. In: Mitchell DG, Cohen MS (eds) MRI principles, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, pp 35–47

33.

Olsen RV, Munk PL, Lee MJ et al (2000) Metal artifact reduction sequence: early clinical applications. Radiographics 20:699–712PubMed

34.

Chang SD, Lee MJ, Munk PL et al (2001) MRI of spinal hardware: comparison of conventional T1-weighted sequence with a new metal artifact reduction sequence. Skeletal Radiol 20:213–218CrossRef

35.

Lee MJ, Janzen DL, Munk PL et al (2001) Quantitative assessment of an MR technique for reducing metal artifact: application to spin-echo imaging in a phantom. Skeletal Radiol 30:398–401PubMedCrossRef

36.

Potter HG, Nestor BJ, Bryan J et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging after total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of periprosthetic soft tissue. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:1947–1954PubMed

37.

Suh JS, Jeong EK, Shin KH et al (1998) Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1207–1213PubMed

Title: Metal-related artifacts in instrumented spine. Techniques for reducing artifacts in CT and MRI: state of the art
Authors: P. Stradiotti
A. Curti
G. Castellazzi
A. Zerbi
Publication date: 01-06-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue Special Issue 1/2009
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0998-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Metal-related artifacts in instrumented spine. Techniques for reducing artifacts in CT and MRI: state of the art

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Special Issue 1/2009

Molecular MR imaging for the evaluation of the effect of dynamic stabilization on lumbar intervertebral discs

Outcomes of C1 and C2 posterior screw fixation for upper cervical spine fusion

Relevance of the cranioaxial angle in the occipitocervical stabilization using an original construct: a retrospective study on 50 patients

Early results and review of the literature of a novel hybrid surgical technique combining cervical arthrodesis and disc arthroplasty for treating multilevel degenerative disc disease: opposite or complementary techniques?

Articular facets syndrome: diagnostic grading and treatment options

Comparison of single-level L4–L5 versus L5–S1 lumbar disc replacement: results and prognostic factors