ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2020
Metal artifact reduction using mono-energy images combined with metal artifact reduction software in spectral computed tomography: a study on phantoms.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of deep-learning reconstruction combined with metal artifact reduction algorithm for dual-energy computed tomography angiography in intracranial aneurysm coil embolization.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
- Noise-related inaccuracies in the quantitative evaluation of CT artifacts.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- A robust index for metal artifact quantification in computed tomography.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Prediction of proton beam range in phantom with metals based on monochromatic energy CT images.Journal of radiation research · 2022Article
- The Impact of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Exposure Parameters on Peri-Implant Artifacts: A Literature Review.Cureus · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of spectral computed tomography (CT) mono-energy imaging combined with metal artifact reduction software (MARs) for metal implant artifact reduction using a phantom.
methodsA quantitative standard phantom with 9 cylinders was used to simulate the attenuation of the different tissues of the human body around the metal implant. Groups A and B were divided according to conventional CT scan mode and spectral CT scan mode. Three sets of reconstructed images, including 120 kVp-like + MARs images, mono-energy images (MonoE), and MonoE + MARs images, were generated after spectral CT scanning. High-attenuation artifacts and low-attenuation artifacts were observed around the coil in the images of groups A and B. The CT values (Hounsfield unit) and standard deviation (SD) values of the artifacts were measured, and the artifact index and hardening artifact removal rate were calculated.
resultsCompared to conventional poly-energy CT images, for high-attenuation and low-attenuation artifacts, the artifact indices of 120 kVp-like + MARs, MonoE, and MonoE + MARs images were all reduced significantly. The hardening artifact removal rates of the high-attenuation and low-attenuation artifacts of 120 kVp-like + MARs images were 82% and 92%, respectively. The hardening artifact removal rate of the high-attenuation and low-attenuation artifacts of MonoE and MonoE + MARs images increased with the mono-energy level.
conclusionsSpectral CT using the 120 kVp-like + MARs, 110-140 keV MonoE, and MonoE + MARs reconstruction methods can reduce metal implant artifacts in varying degrees. MonoE + MARs reconstruction was the best method for reducing metal artifacts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.