DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2025.112606
Usefulness of metal artifact reduction on CT angiography after massive coil embolization in peripheral AVM.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the image quality of three reconstruction methods-filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (AR50), and deep learning-based reconstruction (DL-M)-processed with the Smart Metal Artifact Reduction (SMAR) technique for post-embolization assessment of peripheral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs).
MATERIALS AND
METHODS
In this prospective single-center study, 30 patients who underwent coil embolization for AVM were included. Post-embolization CT angiography was performed using dual-energy CT. Virtual monoenergetic images at 50 and 70 keV were reconstructed using FBP, AR50, and DL-M. All were processed with SMAR, and DL-M without SMAR served as the baseline. Artifact severity was objectively assessed using the standard deviation (SD) around the AVM, artifact index (AI), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Two readers (a resident and a staff radiologist) subjectively graded artifact severity, vessel visualization, and new artifacts using 4-point scales.
RESULTS
At both energy levels, average SD and AI were significantly lower in SMAR-processed images than in baseline DL-M (all p < 0.001). Subjective scores for artifact reduction and visualization of adjacent vessels were also significantly improved (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences among the three SMAR-processed methods. New artifacts appeared in three cases but had minimal effect on interpretability.
CONCLUSIONS
SMAR-processed FBP, AR50, and DL-M reconstructions significantly reduced metal artifacts and improved visualization after AVM coil embolization, supporting their value for post-treatment evaluation and clinical decision-making.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.