Evaluating applicability of metal artifact reduction algorithm for head and neck radiation treatment planning CT

The purpose of this study is evaluation for the applicability of O-MAR(Metal artifact Reduction for Orthopedic Implants)(ver. 3.6.0, Philips, Netherlands) in head and neck radiation treatment planning CT with metal artifact created by dental implant. All of the in this study's CT images were scanned by Brilliance Big Bore CT(Philips, Netherlands) at 120 kVp, 2 mm sliced and Metal artifact reduced by O-MAR. To compare the original and reconstructed CT images worked on RTPS(Eclipse ver 10.0.42, Varian, USA). In order to test the basic performance of the O-MAR, The phantom was made to create metal artifact by dental implant and other phantoms used for without artifact images. To measure a difference of HU in with artifact images and without artifact images, homogeneous phantom and inhomogeneous phantoms were used with cerrobend rods. Each of images were compared a difference of HU in ROIs. And also, 1 case of patient's original CT image applied O-MAR and density corrected CT were evaluated for dose distributions with SNC Patient(Sun Nuclear Co., USA). In cases of head and neck phantom, the difference of dose distribution is appeared 99.8% gamma passing rate(criteria 2 mm / 2%) between original and CT images applied O-MAR. And 98.5% appeared in patient case, among original CT, O-MAR and density corrected CT. The difference of total dose distribution is less than 2% that appeared both phantom and patient case study. Though the dose deviations are little, there are still matters to discuss that the dose deviations are concentrated so locally. In this study, The quality of all images applied O-MAR was improved. Unexpectedly, Increase of max. HU was founded in air cavity of the O-MAR images compare to cavity of the original images and wrong corrections were appeared, too. The result of study assuming restrained case of O-MAR adapted to near skin and low density area, it appeared image distortion and artifact correction simultaneously. In O-MAR CT, air cavity area even turned tissue HU by wrong correction was founded, too. Consequentially, It seems O-MAR algorithm is not perfect to distinguish air cavity and photon starvation artifact. Nevertheless, the differences of HU and dose distribution are not a huge that is not suitable for clinical use. And there are more advantages in clinic for improved quality of CT images and DRRs, precision of contouring OARs or tumors and correcting artifact area. So original and O-MAR CT must be used together in clinic for more accurate treatment plan