PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 28, 2026The Veterinary Journal0 citationsOpen Access

Evaluation of artifacts produced by cannulated and solid-core screws using magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography

View Full Paper
GCG.R. CassanegoSRS.C. RahalTST. S. G. dos Santos

Key Points

  • The study aims to evaluate imaging artifacts associated with titanium screws using MRI and CT.
  • Three different screw types were evaluated: solid versus cannulated, with different dimensions and designs.
  • MRI and CT imaging sequences were used to assess the artifacts produced by the screws in canine humeral condyle.
  • Artifacts were measured and compared for different screws and imaging protocols.
  • Solid screws caused more localized artifacts on MRI but had less severe effects on CT imaging.
  • Cannulated screws generated larger areas of signal loss, impacting MRI evaluation but feasible for structural assessment.
  • Overall artifact measurements were higher for cannulated screws in two groups, while one group favored solid screws.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate, using both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT), the imaging artifacts associated with two types of titanium screws—cannulated and solid—from three different manufacturers, implanted in the canine humeral condyle. Three groups were established: G1 – 3.5 × 30 mm solid cortical screws and partially threaded cannulated screws; G2 – 3.5 × 28 mm solid cortical screws and 3.5 × 26 mm fully threaded conical compression cannulated screws; and G3 – 3.5 × 30 mm solid screws and 3.0 × 26 mm fully threaded conical compression cannulated screws. MRI evaluation was performed using SE DP/T2, Turbo 3D T1, STIR, and fast FLAIR sequences, while CT evaluation used transverse images. On MRI, solid screws produced more discrete and localized artifacts, mainly as peri-implant signal void/blooming with minimal geometric distortion and mild limitation of cortical and articular surface assessment. In contrast, cannulated screws generated larger areas of signal loss, especially in Turbo 3D T1 and fat-suppressed STIR/FLAIR sequences, although humeral condyle evaluation remained feasible. On CT, solid screws exhibited more pronounced metallic artifacts (beam hardening, streaks, mild blooming) compared with cannulated screws; however, these artifacts did not prevent assessment of peri-implant structures. Artifact measurements on MRI (Turbo 3D T1) and CT were higher for cannulated screws in G1 and G2, whereas in G3 solid screw produced greater artifact. In conclusion, both design and material composition of the screw significantly influence image quality, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when selecting the screw and planning imaging protocols.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cassanego et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69f04e08727298f751e72023https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2026.106691
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Current Uses for Medical Imaging With Orthopaedic Implant Technology2026 · 1 citations
  2. 2Managing hardware-related metal artifacts in MRI: current and evolving techniques2024 · 63 citations
  3. 3Evaluation of MR issues for the latest standard brands of orthopedic metal implants: Plates and screws2014 · 37 citations
  4. 4Magnetic resonance safety2016 · 175 citations
  5. 5Technical Considerations: CT and MR Imaging in the Postoperative Orthopedic Patient2002 · 156 citations