Physical phenomena affecting quantitative imaging of ultrasound contrast agents

Applied Acoustics

Volumn 70, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 1352-1362

  Stride, E ^a   Tang, M X ^b   Eckersley, R J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Artefacts; Microbubbles; Multiple scattering; Nonlinear propagation; Quantitative imaging; Ultrasound contrast agents

Indexed keywords

ARTEFACTS; MICROBUBBLES; NONLINEAR PROPAGATION; QUANTITATIVE IMAGING; ULTRASOUND CONTRAST AGENTS;

ACOUSTIC WAVES; MEDICAL IMAGING; MULTIPLE SCATTERING; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PHYSIOLOGICAL MODELS; PLASTIC COATINGS; SURFACE ACTIVE AGENTS; ULTRASONICS;

ULTRASONIC IMAGING;

EID: 67349247425     PISSN: 0003682X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2008.10.003     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Cosgrove D. Ultrasound contrast agents: an overview. Eur J Radiology 60 (2006) 324-330
2. Leen E., Ceccotti P., Kalogeropoulou C., et al. Prospective multicenter trial evaluating a novel method of characterizing focal liver lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography. Am J Roentgenol 186 (2006) 1551-1559
3. Leen E., Ceccotti P., Moug S.J., et al. Potential value of contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography during partial hepatectomy for metastases - an essential investigation before resection?. Ann Surg 243 (2006) 236-240
4. Vilana R., Bianchi L., Varela M., et al. Is microbubble-enhanced ultrasonography sufficient for assessment of response to percutaneous treatment in patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma?. Eur Radiol 16 (2006) 2454-2462
5. Wei K., Jayaweera A.R., Firoozan S., et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with ultrasound-induced destruction of microbubbles administered as a constant venous infusion. Circulation 97 (1998) 473-483
6. Lindner J.R., Villanueva F.S., Dent J.M., et al. Assessment of resting perfusion with myocardial contrast echocardiography: theoretical and practical considerations. Am Heart J vol. 139 (2000) 231-240
7. Kaufmann B., Wei K., and Lindner J. Contrast echocardiography. Curr Probl Cardiol 32 (2007) 51-96
8. Gracewski S., Miao H., and Dalecki D. Simulation of an acoustically excited bubble within a compliant vessel. J Acoust Soc Am 121 (2007) 3058
9. Plesset M., and Prosperetti A. Bubble dynamics and cavitation. Ann Rev. Fluid Mech 9 (1977) 145-185
10. Stride E. The influence of surface adsorption on bubble dynamics. Phil Trans Roy Soc A 366 (2008) 2103-2115
11. Church C. The effects of an elastic solid surface layer on the radial pulsations of gas bubbles. J Acoust Soc Am 97 (1995) 1510-1520
12. Vokurka K. Amplitudes of free bubble oscillations in liquids. J Sound Vibration 141 (1990) 259-275
13. Hilgenfeldt S., Lohse D., and Zomack M. Sound scattering and localised heat deposition of pulse-driven microbubbles. J Acoust Soc Am 107 (2000) 3530-3539
14. Stride E. Characterisation and design of microbubble ultrasound contrast agents. University of London Thesis; 2005. 226-239.
15. Foldy L. The multiple scattering of waves I. General theory of isotropic scattering by randomly distributed scatterers. Phys Rev 67 (1945) 107-119
16. Stride E., and Saffari N. Investigating the significance of multiple scattering in ultrasound contrast agent particle populations. IEEE Trans Ultras Ferr Freq Cont 52 (2005) 2332-2345
17. Feuillade C. Acoustically coupled gas bubbles in fluids: time-domain phenomena. J Acoust Soc Am 109 (2001) 2606-2615
18. Chetty K., Stride E., Sennoga C., Hajnal J., and Eckersley R. High speed optical observations and simulation results of sonovue microbubbles at low insonation pressures. IEEE Trans Ultras Ferr Freq Cont 55 (2008) 1333-1342
19. Tang M., Eckersley R., and Noble J. Pressure-dependent attenuation with microbubbles at low mechanical index. Ultrasound in Med Biol 31 (2005) 377-384
20. ® (The Mathworks, Natick, MA, USA); 2006.
21. Nyborg W. Biological effects of ultrasound: development of safety guidelines. Part II: general review. Ultrasound in Med Biol 27 (2001) 301-333
22. Overvelde M, Dollet B, Garbin V, de Jong N, Lohse D, Versluis M. Nonlinear coating behavior of ultrasound contrast agents near resonance. In: 13th Eur Symp ultrasound contrast imaging. Hilton Hotel, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 24-26th Jan 2008.
23. de Jong N., Emmer M., Chin C., et al. Compression only behaviour or phospholipid coated contrast bubbles. Ultrasound in Med Biol 33 (2007) 653-656
24. Tsochatzidis N., Guiraud P., Wilhelm A., and Delmas H. Determination of velocity, size and concentration of ultrasonic cavitation bubbles by the phase-Doppler technique. Chem Eng Sci 56 (2001) 1831-1840
25. Longuet-Higgins M. Monopole emission of sound by asymmetric bubble oscillations. J Fluid Mech 201 (1989) 525-541
26. Hoff L., Sontum P., and Hovem J. Oscillations of polymeric microbubbles: effect of the encapsulating coating. J Acoust Soc Am 107 (2000) 2272-2280
27. Sijl J, de Jong N, Versluis M, Lohse D, Gaud E, Arditi M. Acoustical characterization of individual phospholipid-based ultrasound contrast agent microbubbles. In: IEEE Ultrasonics symposium; 2006. p. 1349-1353.
28. van der Meer S., et al. Microbubble spectroscopy of ultrasound contrast agents. J Acoust. Soc Am 121 (2007) 648-656
29. Emmer M., Van Wamel A., Goertz D.E., et al. The onset of microbubble vibration. Ultrasound Med Biol 33 (2007) 941-949
30. Chetty K. Ultrasound contrast agents. Microbubble modelling and advanced detection strategies. Thesis, Imperial College: London; 2008. p. 188.
31. Chomas J., Dayton P., Allen J., et al. Mechanisms of contrast agent destruction. IEEE Trans Ultrason, Ferr Freq Cont 48 (2001) 232-248
32. Borden M., Kruse D., Caskey C., Shukui Z., Dayton P., and Ferrara K. Influence of lipid coating physicochemical properties on ultrasound-induced microbubble destruction. IEEE Trans Ultrason, Ferr Freq Cont 52 (2005) 1992-2002
33. Fyrillas M., and Szeri A. Dissolution or growth of soluble spherical oscillating bubbles. J Fluid Mech 289 (1995) 295-314
34. Glazman R. Damping of bubble oscillations induced by transport of surfactants between the adsorbed film and the bulk solution. J Acoust Soc Am 76 (1984) 890-896
35. ® micropheres. Ultrasonics 31 (1993) 175-181
36. ®. J Acoust Soc Am 104 (1998) 1654-1666
37. Frinking P., and de Jong N. Acoustic modeling of shell-encapsulated gas bubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol 24 (1998) 523-533
38. Tang M., and Eckersley R. Frequency and pressure dependent attenuation and scattering by microbubbles. Ultrasound in Med Biol 33 (2007) 164-168
39. Emmer M., Vos H., van Wamel A., et al. Clinical relevance of pressure-dependent scattering at low acoustic pressures. Ultrasonics 47 (2007) 74-77
40. Sboros V., MacDonald C., Pye S., et al. The dependence of ultrasound contrast agents backscatter on acoustic pressure: theory versus experiment. Ultrasonics 40 (2002) 579-583
41. Morgan K., Dayton P., Kruse D., et al. Changes in the echoes from ultrasonic contrast agents with imaging parameters. IEEE Trans Ultrasonics, Ferr Freq Cont 45 (1998) 1537-1548
42. Shi W., Forsberg F., Raichlen J., et al. Pressure dependence of subharmonic signals from contrast microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol 25 (1999) 275-283
43. Tang M, Mari J, Wells P, Eckersley R. Attenuation correction in ultrasound contrast agent imaging: elementary theory and preliminary experimental evaluation, Ultrasound in Med. Biol. (in press doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.).
44. Gorce J., Arditi M., and Schneider M. Influence of bubble size distribution on the echogenicity of ultrasound contrast agents: a study of SonoVue. Invest Radiol 35 (2000) 661-671
45. Hamilton M, Blackstock D. Non-linear acoustics, Academic Press; 1998. ISBN 0-12-321860-8.
46. Leighton T. Acoustic Bubble, Academic Press; 1997. ISBN-10: 0124419216.
47. Tang M., and Eckersley R. Nonlinear propagation of ultrasound through microbubble contrast agents and implications for imaging. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferr Freq Cont 53 (2006) 2406-2415