Prevalence and Patterns of Computed Tomography Image Artefacts in a Radio-Diagnostic Centre in Anambara State of Nigeria 0 4
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60787/sjhrs.vol1no1.8Keywords:
Computed Tomography, Prevalence, Imaging, ArtefactsAbstract
Background: Artefacts are a common occurrence in Computed Tomography (CT) imaging which obscure or simulate pathology. They often contribute to the degradation of the images produced hence the need to eliminate
or reduce them to the barest minimum.
Objective: The objective of the study was to determine the prevalence and patterns of artefacts encountered during computed tomography examinations.
Methods: A cross-sectional study design was adopted for the evaluation of CT image artefacts. Images generated during computed tomography examinations were analyzed for the presence of artefacts.
Results: A total of 350 images were analyzed for the presence of artefacts. The result showed that 62.6% (219) of the images had artefacts while 37.4% (131) of the images had no artefact. Four types of artefacts were identified with 93 images (26.6%) showing motion artefacts, 81 images (23.1%) had streak artefacts, 5 images (1.4%) had photon starvation artefacts, while 2 images (0.6%) had ring artefacts. Some images had a combination of two artefacts with motion and streak artefacts occurring in 29 images (8.3%). Motion and ring artefacts occurred in 2 images (0.6%), motion and photon starvation artefacts occurred in 2 images (0.6%) while streak and photon starvation artefacts occurred in 1 image (0.3%).
Conclusion: Computed Tomography images had a high prevalence of artefacts with motion artefact as the most common artefact. Some design features should be incorporated into modern Computed Tomography scanners to minimize the appearance of artefacts or protocol optimization and advanced reconstruction techniques should be utilized to mitigate artefact-related image degradation.
Downloads
References
1. Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM, Boone JM 2012. The essential physics of medical imaging. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins
2. Adejoh T, Nzotta CC, Umeh EO, Aronu ME, Dambele MY, 2017. Head Computed Tomography Protocol Audit & Correction in Two Tertiary Health Institutions in Anambra State of Nigeria. West African Journal of Radiology, 24(2): 157 – 161 DOI: 10.4103/1115-3474.206807
3. Barrett JF, Keat N, 2004. Artifacts in CT: Recognition and avoidance. Radiographics, 24(6): 1679-1691
4. Jaju PP, Jain M, Singh A, Gupta A, 2013. Artefacts in cone beam CT. Open Journal of Stomatology; 3(5): 292-297
5. Boas FE, Fleischmann D, 2012. CT artifacts: Causes and reduction techniques. Imaging in medicine, 4(2): 229-240. 6. Lee YH, 2016. Artefacts in CT scans: A review of the literature. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, 47(3): 342-353
7. Alzain AF, Elhussein N, Elamin BA (2021).Common computed tomography artifact: Source and avoidance. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med: 52 (1):151-15853 The Sub-Saharan Journal of Health and Radiation Sciences | Issue 1 | Volume 1 |Jan - June 2026 Ogolodom et. al, Prevalence and Patterns of Computed Tomography Image Artefacts
8. Adejoh T, Onwudiliora OE, Ukaji NF, Nzotta CC, Nwefuru OS, Aniagolu CA, Ogbonna KJ, Onuegbu CN (2015). Analysis of artefacts from Computed Tomography of the head at Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital, Nnewi. Nigerian Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy. 4(1):1-10
9. Veikutis V, Budrys T, Basevicius A, Lukosevicius S, Gleizniene R, Unikas R, Skaudickas D (2015): Artifacts in Computer Tomography Imaging: How it can really affect diagnostic image quality and confuse clinical diagnosis. 17(2): 995-1003
Ogolodom MP, David LK, Erondu IF, Okeji MC, Mbaba AN. Patterns of Incidence of Traumatic Head Injury among Patients that underwent
Cranio-facial Computed Tomography scan in Port Harcourt Metropolis Rivers State, Nigeria. Health Science Journal 2019;13(1).
