Download PDF
Radiopraxis 2018; 11(04): E41-E60
DOI: 10.1055/a-0752-6970
CPD–Fortbildung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Reduktion von Metallartefakten in der muskuloskelettalen Bildgebung

R. Sutter
,
T Dietrich
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 December 2018 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Gelenkprothesen und andere orthopädische Implantate werden bei vielen Patienten mit muskuloskelettalen Erkrankungen eingesetzt. Während diese Operationen häufig ein gutes klinisches Ergebnis zeigen, sind im Verlauf bei vielen Patienten radiologische Untersuchungen notwendig. Orthopädische Implantate führen jedoch in der MRT und der CT zu starken Metallartefakten. Dieser Artikel stellt mehrere grundlegende Methoden sowie fortgeschrittene Techniken zur Reduktion dieser Artefakte für MRT und CT vor, um eine diagnostische Untersuchung bei Patienten mit Metallimplantaten zu ermöglichen. MRT und CT werden so zu wichtigen und zuverlässigen Modalitäten, um Patienten mit Gelenkprothesen und orthopädischen Implantaten zu untersuchen.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Beswick AD, Wylde V, Gooberman-Hill R. et al. What proportion of patients report long-term pain after total hip or knee replacement for osteoarthritis? A systematic review of prospective studies in unselected patients. BMJ open 2012; 2: e000435
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Miller TT. Imaging of joint replacements. Seminars in musculoskeletal radiology 2015; 19: 1-2
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hargreaves BA, Worters PW, Pauly KB. et al. Metal-induced artifacts in MRI. AJR 2011; 197: 547-555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Liebl H, Heilmeier U, Lee S. et al. In vitro assessment of knee MRI in the presence of metal implants comparing MAVRIC-SL and conventional fast spin echo sequences at 1.5 and 3 T field strength. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Ulbrich EJ, Sutter R, Aguiar RF. et al. STIR sequence with increased receiver bandwidth of the inversion pulse for reduction of metallic artifacts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012; 199: W735-742
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rampton JW, Young PM, Fidler JL. et al. Putting the fat and water protons to work for you: a demonstration through clinical cases of how fat-water separation techniques can benefit your body MRI practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013; 201: 1303-1308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sutter R, Ulbrich EJ, Jellus V. et al. Reduction of Metal Artifacts in Patients with Total Hip Arthroplasty with Slice-encoding Metal Artifact Correction and View-Angle Tilting MR Imaging. Radiology 2012; 265: 204-214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Koch KM, Brau AC, Chen W. et al. Imaging near metal with a MAVRIC-SEMAC hybrid. Magn Reson Med 2011; 65: 71-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sutter R, Stoel BC, Buck FM. et al. Internal Derangements of Joints-Past, Present, and Future. Invest Radiol 2015; 50: 601-614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Worters PW, Sung K, Stevens KJ. et al. Compressed-sensing multispectral imaging of the postoperative spine. J Magn Reson Imaging 2013; 37: 243-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bachschmidt TJ, Sutter R, Jakob PM. et al. Knee implant imaging at 3 Tesla using high-bandwidth radiofrequency pulses. J Magn Reson Imaging 2015; 41: 1570-1580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 den Harder JC, van Yperen GH, Blume UA. et al. Off-resonance suppression for multispectral MR imaging near metallic implants. Magn Reson Med 2015; 73: 233-243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Lee MJ, Kim S, Lee SA. et al. Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. Radiographics 2007; 27: 791-803
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Pessis E, Campagna R, Sverzut JM. et al. Virtual monochromatic spectral imaging with fast kilovoltage switching: reduction of metal artifacts at CT. Radiographics 2013; 33: 573-583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Link TM, Berning W, Scherf S. et al. CT of metal implants: reduction of artifacts using an extended CT scale technique. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2000; 24: 165-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gondim Teixeira PA, Meyer JB, Baumann C. et al. Total hip prosthesis CT with single-energy projection-based metallic artifact reduction: impact on the visualization of specific periprosthetic soft tissue structures. Skeletal Radiol 2014; 43: 1237-1246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Huang JY, Kerns JR, Nute JL. et al. An evaluation of three commercially available metal artifact reduction methods for CT imaging. Phys Med Biol 2015; 60: 1047-1067
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Guggenberger R, Winklhofer S, Osterhoff G. et al. Metallic artefact reduction with monoenergetic dual-energy CT: systematic ex vivo evaluation of posterior spinal fusion implants from various vendors and different spine levels. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 2357-2364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Han SC, Chung YE, Lee YH. et al. Metal artifact reduction software used with abdominopelvic dual-energy CT of patients with metal hip prostheses: assessment of image quality and clinical feasibility. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014; 203: 788-795
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bamberg F, Dierks A, Nikolaou K. et al. Metal artifact reduction by dual energy computed tomography using monoenergetic extrapolation. Eur Radiol 2011; 21: 1424-1429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mangold S, Gatidis S, Luz O. et al. Single-source dual-energy computed tomography: use of monoenergetic extrapolation for a reduction of metal artifacts. Invest Radiol 2014; 49: 788-793
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar