Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32406534›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2020

CT metal artifact reduction algorithms: Toward a framework for objective performance assessment.

J Y Vaishnav, B Ghammraoui, M Leifer, R Zeng, L Jiang, K J Myers

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Reducing metal artifacts by restricting negative pixels.Visual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

J Y VaishnavDiagnostic X-Ray Systems Branch, Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Devices and Radiological Health, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
B GhammraouiDivision of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
M LeiferDivision of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
R ZengDivision of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
L JiangDiagnostic X-Ray Systems Branch, Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Devices and Radiological Health, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
K J MyersDivision of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability, Office of Science and Engineering Laboratories, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, United States Food & Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA.
United States Food and Drug Administration · USCanon (United States) · USCenter for Devices and Radiological Health · USOffice of Science · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAlthough several metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms for computed tomography (CT) scanning are commercially available, no quantitative, rigorous, and reproducible method exists for assessing their performance. The lack of assessment methods poses a challenge to regulators, consumers, and industry. We explored a phantom-based framework for assessing an important aspect of MAR performance: how applying MAR in the presence of metal affects model observer performance at a low-contrast detectability (LCD) task This work is, to our knowledge, the first model observer-based framework for the evaluation of MAR algorithms in the published literature.

methodsWe designed a numerical head phantom with metal implants. In order to incorporate an element of randomness, the phantom included a rotatable inset with an inhomogeneous background. We generated simulated projection data for the phantom. We applied two variants of a simple MAR algorithm, sinogram inpainting, to the projection data, that we reconstructed using filtered backprojection. To assess how MAR affected observer performance, we examined the detectability of a signal at the center of a region of interest (ROI) by a channelized Hotelling observer (CHO). As a figure of merit, we used the area under the ROC curve (AUC).

resultsWe used simulation to test our framework on two variants of the MAR technique of sinogram inpainting. We found that our method was able to resolve the difference in two different MAR algorithms' effect on LCD task performance, as well as the difference in task performances when MAR was applied, vs not.

conclusionWe laid out a phantom-based framework for objective assessment of how MAR impacts low-contrast detectability, that we tested on two MAR algorithms. Our results demonstrate the importance of testing MAR performance over a range of object and imaging parameters, since applying MAR does not always improve the quality of an image for a given diagnostic task. Our framework is an initial step toward developing a more comprehensive objective assessment method for MAR, which would require developing additional phantoms and methods specific to various clinical applications of MAR, and increasing study efficiency.

Indexed as

ArtifactsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAlgorithmsMetalsPhantoms, ImagingMetalscomputed tomographymetal artifact reductionperformance evaluationvalidation

Identifiers

PMID32406534
PMCPMC7496341
OpenAlexW3024535230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.