Metal Artifact Reduction in CT: Where Are We After Four Decades?

Methods to overcome metal artifacts in computed tomography (CT) images have been researched and developed for nearly 40 years. When X-rays pass through a metal object, depending on its size and density, different physical effects will negatively affect the measurements, most notably beam hardening, scatter, noise, and the non-linear partial volume effect. These phenomena severely degrade image quality and hinder the diagnostic power and treatment outcomes in many clinical applications. In this paper, we first review the fundamental causes of metal artifacts, categorize metal object types, and present recent trends in the CT metal artifact reduction (MAR) literature. To improve image quality and recover information about underlying structures, many methods and correction algorithms have been proposed and tested. We comprehensively review and categorize these methods into six different classes of MAR: metal implant optimization, improvements to the data acquisition process, data correction based on physics models, modifications to the reconstruction algorithm (projection completion and iterative reconstruction), and image-based post-processing. The primary goals of this paper are to identify the strengths and limitations of individual MAR methods and overall classes, and establish a relationship between types of metal objects and the classes that most effectively overcome their artifacts. The main challenges for the field of MAR continue to be cases with large, dense metal implants, as well as cases with multiple metal objects in the field of view. Severe photon starvation is difficult to compensate for with only software corrections. Hence, the future of MAR seems to be headed toward a combined approach of improving the acquisition process with dual-energy CT, higher energy X-rays, or photon-counting detectors, along with advanced reconstruction approaches. Additional outlooks are addressed, including the need for a standardized evaluation system to compare MAR methods.