ArticleSkeletal radiology2022
Reliability and benefits of single-energy projection-based metallic artifact reduction (SEMAR) in the different orthopedic hardware for the hip.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of a second-generation super-resolution deep learning-based reconstruction combined with a metal artifact reduction algorithm for pelvic CT.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Enhancing image quality in computed tomography angiography follow-ups after endovascular aneurysm repair: a comparative study of reconstruction techniques.BMC medical imaging · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the performance and reliability of the single-energy metal artifact reduction (SEMAR) algorithm in patients with different orthopedic hardware at the hips. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 153 patients with hip instrumentation who had undergone CT with adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) 3D and SEMAR algorithms between February 2015 and October 2019 were included retrospectively. Patients were divided into 5 groups by the hardware type. Two readers with 21 and 13 years of experience blindly reviewed all image sets and graded the extent of artifacts and imaging quality using 5-point scales. To evaluate reliability, the mean densities and image noises were measured at the urinary bladder, veins, and fat in images with artifacts and the reference images.
resultsNo significant differences were found in the mean densities of the urinary bladder, veins, and fat between the SEMAR images with artifacts (7.57 ± 9.49, 40.29 ± 23.07, 86.78 ± 38.34) and the reference images (7.77 ± 6.2, 40.27 ± 8.66, 89.10 ± 20.70) (P = .860, .994, .392). Image noises of the urinary bladder in the SEMAR images with artifacts (14.25 ± 4.50) and the SEMAR reference images (9.69 ± 1.29) were significantly higher than those in the AIDR 3D reference images (9.11 ± 1.12) (P < .001; P < .001). All AIDR 3D images were non-diagnostic (overall quality ≤ 3) and less than a quarter of the SEMAR images were non-diagnostic (16.7-23.7%), mainly in patients with prostheses [reader 1: 91.7% (22/24); reader 2: 92.6% (25/27)].
conclusionThe SEMAR algorithm significantly reduces metal artifacts in CT images, more in patients with internal fixations than in patients with prostheses, and provides reliable attenuation of soft tissues.
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.