Subharmonic,Non-linear Fundamental and Ultraharmonic Imaging of Microbubble Contrast at High Frequencies |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Thorax Center, Erasmus MC, Room Ee2302, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands;2. Laboratory of Acoustical Wavefield Imaging, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Delft University of Technology, Building 22, Room B22-D218, Lorentzweg 1, 2628 CJ Delft, the Netherlands;1. Department of Instrument Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China;2. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada;3. National Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Genetics, CAS Center for Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Institute of Plant Physiology and Ecology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China;2. Laboratory of Acoustical Wavefield Imaging, Department of Imaging Physics, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands |
| |
| Abstract: | There is increasing use of ultrasound contrast agent in high-frequency ultrasound imaging. However, conventional contrast detection methods perform poorly at high frequencies. We performed systematic in vitro comparisons of subharmonic, non-linear fundamental and ultraharmonic imaging for different depths and ultrasound contrast agent concentrations (Vevo 2100 system with MS250 probe and MicroMarker ultrasound contrast agent, VisualSonics, Toronto, ON, Canada). We investigated 4-, 6- and 10-cycle bursts at three power levels with the following pulse sequences: B-mode, amplitude modulation, pulse inversion and combined pulse inversion/amplitude modulation. The contrast-to-tissue (CTR) and contrast-to-artifact (CAR) ratios were calculated. At a depth of 8 mm, subharmonic pulse-inversion imaging performed the best (CTR = 26 dB, CAR = 18 dB) and at 16 mm, non-linear amplitude modulation imaging was the best contrast imaging method (CTR = 10 dB). Ultraharmonic imaging did not result in acceptable CTRs and CARs. The best candidates from the in vitro study were tested in vivo in chicken embryo and mouse models, and the results were in a good agreement with the in vitro findings. |
| |
| Keywords: | Ultrasound contrast agent Contrast imaging High-frequency ultrasound Chicken embryo Contrast-to-tissue ratio Non-linear propagation artifact |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
