Skip to main content

Table 3 Distribution of streak artifacts and noise among different reconstruction algorithms and implant configurations (screw/rod). Distribution of most pronounced streak artifacts of the screw shaft (in ΔHU) and corresponding reference HU values of bone and fat tissue among different image reconstruction algorithms. Noise was measured as ± standard deviation (SD) of reference muscle attenuation. Note significantly lower artifact degrees for carbon (C) screw compared to titanium (Ti) screw containing configurations. Rod material had comparably lower impact on artifact degree. Mean HU-values of reference muscle tissue showed no significant differences among reconstructions-algorithms (F = 0.815, p = .615) while in the vertebral body significant inverse correlation with tube voltage (Spearman’s rho= −656, p < .001) was seen. Image noise inversely correlated with tube voltage

From: Comparison of different CT metal artifact reduction strategies for standard titanium and carbon‐fiber reinforced polymer implants in sheep cadavers

  Artifact degree (ΔHU) of screw shaft Reference tissue attenuation (HU)
Ti/Ti Ti/C C/C C/Ti Bone Muscle Noise (± SD)
sk SE 80 kV − 859 − 903 − 37 − 32 872 63 19
bk SE 80 kV − 870 − 898 − 35 − 58 871 63 45
sk SE 120 kV − 848 − 897 − 11 − 39 670 60 14
bk SE 120 kV − 876 − 920 − 48 − 69 656 61 37
sk SE 120 kV iMAR − 768 − 719 − 71 − 106 628 59 16
sk DE 120 kV Mix − 664 − 630 1 − 58 559 61 15
bk DE 120 kV Mix − 713 − 674 − 1 − 63 562 61 43
sk SE Sn 150 kV − 648 − 617 0 − 7 474 60 17
bk SE Sn 150 kV − 691 − 641 − 10 − 5 477 60 53
sk DE ME 130 keV − 615 − 582 13 − 17 402 59 18
bk DE ME 130 keV − 690 − 608 11 − 25 401 60 46
  1. bk bone kernel, C carbon, DE dual energy, HU Hounsfield Units, iMAR iterative metal artifact reduction (brand name), ME monoenergetic extrapolation, SD standard deviation, SE single energy, sk soft tissue kernel, Sn tin-filtered, Ti titanium