ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Comparison of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) polychromatic and monochromatic images with and without iterative metal artifact reduction algorithm in patients with dental implants.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The potential of high-Z contrast media for vessel visualization near metal implants: a photon-counting detector CT phantom study with virtual monoenergetic images and iterative metal artifact reduction.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Virtual monoenergetic imaging for metal artifact reduction in dental implant surgery using photon-counting detector computed tomography.Imaging science in dentistry · 2026Article
- Reduction of metallic artifacts from the novel leadless pacemaker using single-energy metal artifact reduction algorithm in coronary CT angiography.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Effects of iterative metal artifact reduction techniques on diagnostic performance in patients with dental artifacts on carotid computed tomography angiography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and iterative metal artifact reduction (iMAR) algorithms are valuable tools for reducing metal artifacts. Different parameters of these technologies and their combination can achieve different performance. This study compared various polychromatic and monochromatic images obtained via DECT with and without using iMAR algorithm to reduce artifacts in patients with dental implants. Methods: This study included 30 patients with dental implants who underwent DECT for head and neck imaging. The computed tomography (CT) image sets comprised DECT polychromatic image sets [dual-energy (DE) polychromatic] that linearly blended 100 kV and tin-filtered 140 kV images using composition ratios of -1, -0.6, -0.3, 0, and 0.6, and virtual monochromatic images (DE monochromatic) at 90, 110, 130, 150, and 170 keV. These image sets were obtained with and without using iMAR, resulting in a total of 20 image sets. For subjective analysis, metal artifacts and image quality were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. For objective analysis, CT attenuation, standard deviation (SD), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and artifact index (AI) were evaluated. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed based on implant size. Results: In the subjective evaluation, iMAR + DE polychromatic (-0.3) images exhibited the lowest metal artifact scores [median (interquartile range): 2 (2-3)]. iMAR + DE monochromatic (110 keV) images demonstrated optimal image quality scores [median (interquartile range): 2 (2-3)]. In the objective evaluation, none of the images demonstrated a significant difference in the CNR, except polychromatic images with a composition of -1 and 0.6. iMAR + DE polychromatic (0) exhibited the lowest AI [median (interquartile range): 8.7 (5.9-14.5)]. There was no significant difference between the two groups with different implant sizes for the techniques combined with iMAR (all P>0.05). Conclusion: iMAR + DE polychromatic (-0.3 and 0) and iMAR + DE monochromatic (110 keV) images exhibited better image quality and substantial metal artifact reduction (MAR) compared with the other image sets. The performance of the techniques combined with iMAR was not affected by the size of the implant.
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.