Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Pelvic CT scans in patients with orthopedic implants often produce metal artifacts that degrade image quality and complicate diagnostic interpretation. The Orthopedic Metal Artifact Reduction (O-MAR) algorithm is used to mitigate these artifacts through image reconstruction. However, evidence regarding the application of O-MAR in real-world clinical practice within Indonesian hospitals remains limited. This study aims to describe the pelvic CT scanning technique using O-MAR, explain its role in reducing metal artifacts, and identify the clinical conditions under which it is employed at the Radiology Department of RSUP Dr. Sardjito, Yogyakarta. A qualitative descriptive method with a case study approach was utilized. A preliminary study was conducted around February 2026, followed by the main research from June to July 2026 at the Radiology Department of RSUP Dr. Sardjito, Yogyakarta, after obtaining ethical clearance. Data were collected through observations, interviews with three radiographers and one radiologist, and documentation of pelvic CT scans from patients with metal implants. The data were analyzed descriptively by comparing the research findings with existing theories and literature. The results indicate that pelvic CT scanning using O-MAR involves patient preparation, positioning, parameter selection, data acquisition, and image reconstruction. During the pre-processing stage—prior to scanning—O-MAR is selected and activated for patients with metal implants. O-MAR effectively reduces streak artifacts, enhances the visualization of anatomical structures, and improves image quality for diagnostic interpretation. For patients with metal implants, O-MAR reconstruction is almost always performed, as it yields superior images for evaluation. Although artifacts are not entirely eliminated, the visualization of the acetabulum, femoral head, and soft tissues surrounding the implants becomes clearer, thereby facilitating diagnostic assessment. O-MAR is primarily applied during postoperative evaluations for patients with orthopedic implants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
El-Rodhyah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: