Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Journal Article

A standardized evaluation of artefacts from metallic compounds during fast MR imaging

There are no MPG-Authors in the publication available
External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Murakami, S., Verdonschot, R. G., Kataoka, M., Kakimoto, N., Shimamoto, H., & Kreiborg, S. (2016). A standardized evaluation of artefacts from metallic compounds during fast MR imaging. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, 45(8): 20160094. doi:10.1259/dmfr.20160094.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0008-E1A3-1
Objectives: Metallic compounds present in the oral and maxillofacial regions (OMRs) cause large artefacts during MR scanning. We quantitatively assessed these artefacts embedded within a phantom according to standards set by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
Methods: Seven metallic dental materials (each of which was a 10-mm(3) cube embedded within a phantom) were scanned [i.e. aluminium (Al), silver alloy (Ag), type IV gold alloy (Au), gold-palladium-silver alloy (Au-Pd-Ag), titanium (Ti), nickel-chromium alloy (NC) and cobalt-chromium alloy (CC)] and compared with a reference image. Sequences included gradient echo (GRE), fast spin echo (FSE), gradient recalled acquisition in steady state (GRASS), a spoiled GRASS (SPGR), a fast SPGR (FSPGR), fast imaging employing steady state (FIESTA) and echo planar imaging (EPI; axial/sagittal planes). Artefact areas were determined according to the ASTM-F2119 standard, and artefact volumes were assessed using OsiriX MD software (Pixmeo, Geneva, Switzerland).
Results: Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests were used for statistical comparisons. For most materials, scanning sequences eliciting artefact volumes in the following (ascending) order FSE-T-1/FSE-T-2 < FSPGR/SPGR < GRASS/GRE < FIESTA < EPI. For all scanning sequences, artefact volumes containing Au, Al, Ag and Au-Pd-Ag were significantly smaller than other materials (in which artefact volume size increased, respectively, from Ti < NC < CC). The artefact-specific shape (elicited by the cubic sample) depended on the scanning plane (i.e. a circular pattern for the axial plane and a "clover-like" pattern for the sagittal plane).
Conclusions: The availability of standardized information on artefact size and configuration during MRI will enhance diagnosis when faced with metallic compounds in the OMR.