Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Clinically Based QUS Phantom Study and Methodologies

IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 218-231

  Han, Aiguo ^a   Andre, Michael P ^b,c   Erdman, John W ^d   Loomba, Rohit ^b   Sirlin, Claude B ^b   O'Brien, William D ^a  

^a University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c VA SAN DIEGO HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Attenuation coefficient; backscatter coefficient; quantitative ultrasound; repeatability and reproducibility

Indexed keywords

BACKSCATTERING; RANDOM PROCESSES; SCANNING; ULTRASONICS;

ATTENUATION COEFFICIENT; BACKSCATTER COEFFICIENTS; MEASUREMENT AND ANALYSIS; MULTIPLE SESSIONS; QUANTITATIVE ULTRASOUNDS; RANDOM-EFFECT MODELS; REPRODUCIBILITIES; ULTRASOUND SCANNERS;

TRANSDUCERS;

ALGORITHM; CALIBRATION; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGING PHANTOM; LIVER DISEASE; OBESITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARDS;

ALGORITHMS; CALIBRATION; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LIVER DISEASES; OBESITY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 85014855535     PISSN: 08853010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TUFFC.2016.2588979     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. DDT Glossary, accessed on Mar. 30, 2016. [Online]. Available: ht.tp://w.ww.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DrugDevelopmentToolsQualificationProgram/ucm284395.htm
2. L. G. Kessler et al., The emerging science of quantitative imaging biomarkers terminology and definitions for scientific studies and regulatory submissions, Statist. Methods Med. Res., vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 9-26, 2015, doi: 10.1177/0962280214537333.
3. S. C. Lin et al., Noninvasive diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and quantification of liver fat using a new quantitative ultrasound technique, Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol., vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1337-1345, Jul. 2015.
4. L. X. Yao, J. A. Zagzebski, and E. L. Madsen, Backscatter coefficient measurements using a reference phantom to extract depth-dependent instrumentation factors, Ultrason. Imag., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 58-70, Jan. 1990.
5. S. S. Brunke, M. F. Insana, J. J. Dahl, C. Hansen, M. Ashfaq, and H. Ermert, An ultrasound research interface for a clinical system, IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 198-210, Jan. 2007.
6. M. P. Andre et al., Accurate diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in human participants via quantitative ultrasound, in Proc. IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp., Sep. 2014, pp. 2375-2377.
7. Y. Labyed, Optimization and application of ultrasound attenuation estimation algorithms, Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Elect. Comput. Eng., Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA, USA, 2011.
8. Y. Labyed, T. A. Bigelow, and B. L. McFarlin, Estimate of the attenuation coefficient using a clinical array transducer for the detection of cervical ripening in human pregnancy, Ultrasonics, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 34-39, Jan. 2011.
9. A. Han, R. Abuhabsah, R. J. Miller, S. Sarwate, and W. D. OBrien, Jr., The measurement of ultrasound backscattering from cell pellet biophantoms and tumors ex vivo, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 134, no. 1, pp. 686-693, 2013.
10. N. Bilaniuk and G. S. K. Wong, Speed of sound in pure water as a function of temperature, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 1609-1612, 1993.
11. K. A. Wear et al., Interlaboratory comparison of ultrasonic backscatter coefficient measurements from 2 to 9 MHz, J. Ultrasound Med., vol. 24, no. 9, pp. 1235-1250, Sep. 2005.
12. F. H. Fisher and V. P. Simmons, Sound absorption in sea water, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 558-564, 1977.
13. X. Chen, D. Phillips, K. Q. Schwarz, J. G. Mottley, and K. J. Parker, The measurement of backscatter coefficient from a broadband pulse-echo system: A new formulation, IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 515-525, Mar. 1997.
14. R. K. Burdick, C. M. Borror, and D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Gauge R&R Studies: Making Decisions With Confidence Intervals in Random and Mixed ANOVA Models, ASA-SIAM Series on Statistics and Applied Probability. Philadelphia, PA, USA: SIAM, 2005.
15. Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA) Work Group, Measurement Systems Analysis: Reference Manual, 4th ed., Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation, Jun. 2010, p. 123.
16. J. M. Hudson, L. Milot, C. Parry, R. Williams, and P. N. Burns, Inter- and intra-operator reliability and repeatability of shear wave elastography in the liver: A study in healthy volunteers, Ultrasound Med. Biol., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 950-955, Jun. 2013.
17. G. Ferraioli et al., Reproducibility of real-time shear wave elastography in the evaluation of liver elasticity, Eur. J. Radiol., vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 3102-3106, Nov. 2012.
18. S. Strauss, E. Gavish, P. Gottlieb, and L. Katsnelson, Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the sonographic assessment of fatty liver, Amer. J. Roentgenol., vol. 189, no. 6, pp. W320-W323, Dec. 2007.
19. T. J. Hall et al., RSNA/QIBA: Shear wave speed as a biomarker for liver fibrosis staging, in Proc. IEEE Int. Ultrason. Symp., Jul. 2013, pp. 397-400.
20. S. Bota, I. Sporea, R. Sirli, A. Popescu, M. Danila, and D. Costachescu, Intra- and interoperator reproducibility of acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography-preliminary results, Ultrasound Med. Biol., vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 1103-1108, Jul. 2012.