Biomedical Engineering Letters

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 139–155 | Cite as

Clinical photoacoustic imaging platforms

  • Wonseok Choi
  • Eun-Yeong Park
  • Seungwan Jeon
  • Chulhong Kim
Review Article


Photoacoustic imaging (PAI) is a new promising medical imaging technology available for diagnosing and assessing various pathologies. PAI complements existing imaging modalities by providing information not currently available for diagnosing, e.g., oxygenation level of the underlying tissue. Currently, researchers are translating PAI from benchside to bedside to make unique clinical advantages of PAI available for patient care. The requirements for a successful clinical PAI system are; deeper imaging depth, wider field of view, and faster scan time than the laboratory-level PAI systems. Currently, many research groups and companies are developing novel technologies for data acquisition/signal processing systems, detector geometry, and an acoustic sensor. In this review, we summarize state-of-the-art clinical PAI systems with three types of the imaging transducers: linear array transducer, curved linear array transducer, and volumetric array transducer. We will also discuss the limitations of the current PAI systems and describe latest techniques being developed to address these for further enhancing the image quality of PAI for successful clinical translation.


Photoacoustics Optoacoustics Medical imaging Clinical systems Ultrasound array transducer 



This research was supported by the ICT Consilience Creative program (IITP-2017-R0346-16-1007) supervised by the Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion (IITP) and funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT), Republic of Korea, a Grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project (HI15-C1817) through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea, the Pioneer Research Center Program (2017M3C1A3037762) through the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the MSIT, and the NRF Global Ph.D. Fellowship Program of the Ministry of Education (NRF-2014H1A2A1019589).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare to have no conflict of interests.

Human and animals rights

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Not applicable.


  1. 1.
    Bell AG. The photophone. J Franklin Inst. 1880;110:237–48.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valluru KS, Wilson KE, Willmann JK. Photoacoustic Imaging in oncology: translational preclinical and early clinical experience. Radiology. 2016;280:332–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Upputuri PK, Pramanik M. Recent advances toward preclinical and clinical translation of photoacoustic tomography: a review. J Biomed Opt. 2017;22:041006–041006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Valluru KS, Willmann JK. Clinical photoacoustic imaging of cancer. Ultrasonography. 2016;35:267–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cai X, Kim C, Pramanik M, Wang LV. Photoacoustic tomography of foreign bodies in soft biological tissue. J Biomed Opt. 2011;16:046017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang Y, Jeon M, Rich LJ, Hong H, Geng J, Zhang Y, Shi S, Barnhart TE, Alexandridis P, Huizinga JD. Non-invasive multimodal functional imaging of the intestine with frozen micellar naphthalocyanines. Nat Nanotechnol. 2014;9:631–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeon M, Kim C. Multimodal photoacoustic tomography. IEEE Trans Multimedia. 2013;15:975–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee C, Han S, Kim S, Jeon M, Jeon MY, Kim C, Kim J. Combined photoacoustic and optical coherence tomography using a single near-infrared supercontinuum laser source. Appl Opt. 2013;52:1824–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim JY, Lee C, Park K, Han S, Kim C. High-speed and high-SNR photoacoustic microscopy based on a galvanometer mirror in non-conducting liquid. Sci Rep. 2016;6:34803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Park K, Kim JY, Lee C, Jeon S, Lim G, Kim C. Handheld photoacoustic microscopy probe. Sci Rep. 2017;7:13359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim C, Favazza C, Wang LV. In vivo photoacoustic tomography of chemicals: high-resolution functional and molecular optical imaging at new depths. Chem Rev. 2010;110:2756–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yapici MK, Kim C, Chang C-C, Jeon M, Guo Z, Cai X, Zou J, Wang LV. Parallel acoustic delay lines for photoacoustic tomography. J Biomed Opt. 2012;17:116019–116019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Park J, Jeon S, Meng J, Song L, Lee JS, Kim C. Delay-multiply-and-sum-based synthetic aperture focusing in photoacoustic microscopy. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21:036010–036010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Laskey W, Aspelin P, Davidson C, Rudnick M, Aubry P, Kumar S, Gietzen F, Wiemer M, D. S. Group. Nephrotoxicity of iodixanol versus iopamidol in patients with chronic kidney disease and diabetes mellitus undergoing coronary angiographic procedures. Am Heart J. 2009;158:822–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mailloux LU, Napolitano B, Bellucci AG, Vernace M, Wilkes BM, Mossey RT. Renal vascular disease causing end-stage renal disease, incidence, clinical correlates, and outcomes: a 20-year clinical experience. Am J Kidney Dis. 1994;24:622–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abuelo GJ. Diagnosing vascular causes of renal failure. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:601–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, Benjamin EJ, Budoff MJ, Fayad ZA, Foster E, Hlatky MA, Hodgson JM, Kushner FG. 2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines developed in collaboration with the American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:e50–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maslov K, Zhang HF, Wang LV. Effects of wavelength-dependent fluence attenuation on the noninvasive photoacoustic imaging of hemoglobin oxygen saturation in subcutaneous vasculature in vivo. Inverse Prob. 2007;23:S113.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang HF, Maslov K, Sivaramakrishnan M, Stoica G, Wang LV. Imaging of hemoglobin oxygen saturation variations in single vessels in vivo using photoacoustic microscopy. Appl Phys Lett. 2007;90:053901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jeon M, Kim J, Kim C. Multiplane spectroscopic whole-body photoacoustic imaging of small animals in vivo. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2016;54:283–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park S, Lee C, Kim J, Kim C. Acoustic resolution photoacoustic microscopy. Biomed Eng Lett. 2014;4:213–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee C, Jeon M, Jeon MY, Kim J, Kim C. In vitro photoacoustic measurement of hemoglobin oxygen saturation using a single pulsed broadband supercontinuum laser source. Appl Opt. 2014;53:3884–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ku G, Wang X, Xie X, Stoica G, Wang LV. Imaging of tumor angiogenesis in rat brains in vivo by photoacoustic tomography. Appl Opt. 2005;44:770–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lao Y, Xing D, Yang S, Xiang L. Noninvasive photoacoustic imaging of the developing vasculature during early tumor growth. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:4203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mehrmohammadi M, Yoon SJ, Yeager D, Emelianov SY. Photoacoustic imaging for cancer detection and staging. Curr Mol Imaging. 2013;2:89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lakshman M, Needles A. Screening and quantification of the tumor microenvironment with micro-ultrasound and photoacoustic imaging. Nat Methods. 2015;12.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Erpelding TN, Kim C, Pramanik M, Jankovic L, Maslov K, Guo Z, Margenthaler JA, Pashley MD, Wang LV. Sentinel lymph nodes in the rat: noninvasive photoacoustic and US imaging with a clinical US system. Radiology. 2010;256:102–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Akers WJ, Edwards WB, Kim C, Xu B, Erpelding TN, Wang LV, Achilefu S. Multimodal sentinel lymph node mapping with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/computed tomography (CT) and photoacoustic tomography. Transl Res. 2012;159:175–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Taruttis A, Timmermans AC, Wouters PC, Kacprowicz M, van Dam GM, Ntziachristos V. Optoacoustic imaging of human vasculature: feasibility by using a handheld probe. Radiology. 2016;281:256–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Irisawa K, Hirota K, Hashimoto A, Murakoshi D, Ishii H, Tada T, Wada T, Hayakawa T, Azuma R, Otani N, Itoh K, Ishihara M. Photoacoustic imaging system for peripheral small-vessel imaging based on clinical ultrasound technology. Proc SPIE. 2016;9708:970807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    van den Berg PJ, Daoudi K, Bernelot Moens HJ, Steenbergen W. Feasibility of photoacoustic/ultrasound imaging of synovitis in finger joints using a point-of-care system. Photoacoustics. 2017;8:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jo J, Xu G, Marquardt A, Girish G, Wang X. Photoacoustic evaluation of human inflammatory arthritis in human joints. Proc. SPIE. 2017;10064:1006409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weidner N. Tumor angiogenesis: review of current applications in tumor prognostication. In: Seminars in diagnostic pathology; 1993. p. 302–13.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Brenchley P. Antagonising angiogenesis in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60:71–4.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hockel M, Vaupel P. Tumor hypoxia: definitions and current clinical, biologic, and molecular aspects. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:266–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Anderson JL, Halperin JL, Albert NM, Bozkurt B, Brindis RG, Curtis LH, DeMets D, Guyton RA, Hochman JS, Kovacs RJ. Management of patients with peripheral artery disease (compilation of 2005 and 2011 ACCF/AHA guideline recommendations). Circulation. 2013;127:1425–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Park S, Jang J, Kim J, Kim YS, Kim C. Real-time triple-modal photoacoustic, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance fusion imaging of humans. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017;36:1912–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ishihara M, Horiguchi A, Shinmoto H, Tsuda H, Irisawa K, Wada T, Asano T. Comparison of transrectal photoacoustic, Doppler, and magnetic resonance imaging for prostate cancer detection. Proc SPIE. 2016;9708:970852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Guo Z, Li L, Wang LV. On the speckle-free nature of photoacoustic tomography. Med Phys. 2009;36:4084–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jacques SL. Optical properties of biological tissues: a review. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:R37.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kim C, Erpelding TN, Jankovic L, Pashley MD, Wang LV. Deeply penetrating in vivo photoacoustic imaging using a clinical ultrasound array system. Biomed Opt Exp. 2010;1:278–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kang J, Zhang HK, Rahmim A, Wong DF, Kang JU, Boctor EM. Toward high-speed transcranial photoacoustic imaging using compact near-infrared pulsed LED illumination system. In: Photons plus ultrasound: imaging and sensing; 2017. p. 100643B.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Deán-Ben XL, Razansky D. On the link between the speckle free nature of optoacoustics and visibility of structures in limited-view tomography. Photoacoustics. 2016;4:133–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Deán-Ben XL, Razansky D. Functional optoacoustic human angiography with handheld video rate three dimensional scanner. Photoacoustics. 2013;1:68–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kim J, Park S, Jung Y, Chang S, Park J, Zhang Y, Lovell JF, Kim C. Programmable real-time clinical photoacoustic and ultrasound imaging system. Sci Rep. 2016;6:35137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yang M, Zhao L, He X, Su N, Zhao C, Tang H, Hong T, Li W, Yang F, Lin L. Photoacoustic/ultrasound dual imaging of human thyroid cancers: an initial clinical study. Biomed Opt Exp. 2017;8:3449–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dima A, Ntziachristos V. Non-invasive carotid imaging using optoacoustic tomography. Opt Exp. 2012;20:25044–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Diot G, Metz S, Noske A, Liapis E, Schroeder B, Ovsepian SV, Meier R, Rummeny E, Ntziachristos V. Multispectral optoacoustic tomography (MSOT) of human breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:6912–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Oeri M, Bost W, Sénégond N, Tretbar S, Fournelle M. Hybrid photoacoustic/ultrasound tomograph for real-time finger imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2017;43:2200–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ermilov S, Su R, Zamora M, Hernandez T, Nadvoretsky V, Oraevsky A. Optoacoustic angiography of peripheral vasculature. In: Proceedings of SPIE; 2012. p. 82230D.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Toi M, Asao Y, Matsumoto Y, Sekiguchi H, Yoshikawa A, Takada M, Kataoka M, Endo T, Kawaguchi-Sakita N, Kawashima M, Fakhrejahani E, Kanao S, Yamaga I, Nakayama Y, Tokiwa M, Torii M, Yagi T, Sakurai T, Togashi K, Shiina T. Visualization of tumor-related blood vessels in human breast by photoacoustic imaging system with a hemispherical detector array. Sci Rep. 2017;7:41970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Szabo TL, Lewin PA. Ultrasound transducer selection in clinical imaging practice. J Ultrasound Med. 2013;32:573–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Garcia-Uribe A, Erpelding TN, Krumholz A, Ke H, Maslov K, Appleton C, Margenthaler JA, Wang LV. Dual-modality photoacoustic and ultrasound imaging system for noninvasive sentinel lymph node detection in patients with breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2015;5:15748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Neuschler EI, Butler R, Young CA, Barke LD, Bertrand ML, Böhm-Vélez M, Destounis S, Donlan P, Grobmyer SR, Katzen J. A pivotal study of optoacoustic imaging to diagnose benign and malignant breast masses: a new evaluation tool for radiologists. Radiology. 2017; 172228.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kim J, Kim M-H, Jo K, Ha J, Kim Y, Lim D-J, Kim C. Photoacoustic analysis of thyroid cancer in vivo: a pilot study. In: Proceedings of SPIE; 2017. p. 1006408-1.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Hai P, Zhou Y, Liang J, Li C, Wang LV. Photoacoustic tomography of vascular compliance in humans. J Biomed Opt. 2015;20:126008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Butler R, Stavros A, Lavin P, Ulissey M, Tucker F. Opto-acoustic breast imaging: imaging-pathology correlation of opto-acoustic features respecting malignancy; 2015.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ermilov SA, Fronheiser MP, Brecht H-P, Su R, Conjusteau A, Mehta K, Otto P, Oraevsky AA. Development of laser optoacoustic and ultrasonic imaging system for breast cancer utilizing handheld array probes. In: SPIE BiOS; 2009. p. 10.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ishihara M, Tsujita K, Horiguchi K, Irisawa K, Komatsu T, Ayaori M, Hirasawa T, Kasamatsu T, Hirota K, Tsuda H. Development of photoacoustic imaging technology overlaid on ultrasound imaging and its clinical application. In: SPIE BiOS; 2015. p. 93232K–93232K-7.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hai P, Zhou Y, Gong L, Wang LV. Quantitative photoacoustic elastography in humans. J Biomed Opt. 2016;21:5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Daoudi K, van den Berg PJ, Rabot O, Kohl A, Tisserand S, Brands P, Steenbergen W. Handheld probe integrating laser diode and ultrasound transducer array for ultrasound/photoacoustic dual modality imaging. Opt Exp. 2014;22:26365–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Xu G, Rajian JR, Girish G, Kaplan MJ, Fowlkes JB, Carson PL, Wang X. Photoacoustic and ultrasound dual-modality imaging of human peripheral joints. J Biomed Opt. 2013;18:010502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Yuan J, Xu G, Yu Y, Zhou Y, Carson PL, Wang X, Liu X. Real-time photoacoustic and ultrasound dual-modality imaging system facilitated with graphics processing unit and code parallel optimization. J Biomed Opt. 2013;18:086001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Dima A, Ntziachristos V. In-vivo handheld optoacoustic tomography of the human thyroid. Photoacoustics. 2016;4:65–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Okawa S, Sei K, Hirasawa T, Irisawa K, Hirota K, Wada T, Kushibiki T, Furuya K, Ishihara M. In vivo photoacoustic imaging of uterine cervical lesion and its image processing based on light propagation in biological medium. Proc SPIE. 2017;10064:100642S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Buehler A, Kacprowicz M, Taruttis A, Ntziachristos V. Real-time handheld multispectral optoacoustic imaging. Opt Lett. 2013;38:1404–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rosenthal A, Razansky D, Ntziachristos V. Fast semi-analytical model-based acoustic inversion for quantitative optoacoustic tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29:1275–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Glatz J, Deliolanis NC, Buehler A, Razansky D, Ntziachristos V. Blind source unmixing in multi-spectral optoacoustic tomography. Opt Express. 2011;19:3175–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Taruttis A, Rosenthal A, Kacprowicz M, Burton NC, Ntziachristos V. Multiscale multispectral optoacoustic tomography by a stationary wavelet transform prior to unmixing. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2014;33:1194–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Brecht H-P, Su R, Fronheiser M, Ermilov SA, Conjusteau A, Oraevsky AA. Whole-body three-dimensional optoacoustic tomography system for small animals. J Biomed Opt. 2009;14:064007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Heijblom M, Steenbergen W, Manohar S. Clinical photoacoustic breast imaging: the Twente experience. IEEE Pulse. 2015;6:42–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Manohar S, Kharine A, van Hespen JC, Steenbergen W, van Leeuwen TG. The twente photoacoustic mammoscope: system overview and performance. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50:2543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Heijblom M, Piras D, Brinkhuis M, van Hespen JCG, van den Engh FM, van der Schaaf M, Klaase JM, van Leeuwen TG, Steenbergen W, Manohar S. Photoacoustic image patterns of breast carcinoma and comparisons with Magnetic resonance Imaging and vascular stained histopathology. Sci Rep. 2015;5:11778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Kruger RA, Kuzmiak CM, Lam RB, Reinecke DR, Del Rio SP, Steed D. Dedicated 3D photoacoustic breast imaging. Med Phys. 2013;40:113301.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Chuah S, Attia A, Long V, Ho C, Malempati P, Fu C, Ford S, Lee J, Tan W, Razansky D. Structural and functional 3D mapping of skin tumours with non-invasive multispectral optoacoustic tomography. Skin Res Technol. 2017;23:221–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Deán-Ben X, Merčep E, Razansky D. Hybrid-array-based optoacoustic and ultrasound (OPUS) imaging of biological tissues. Appl Phys Lett. 2017;110:203703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gateau J, Gesnik M, Chassot J-M, Bossy E. Single-side access, isotropic resolution, and multispectral three-dimensional photoacoustic imaging with rotate-translate scanning of ultrasonic detector array. J Biomed Opt. 2015;20:056004-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Schwarz M, Buehler A, Ntziachristos V. Isotropic high resolution optoacoustic imaging with linear detector arrays in bi-directional scanning. J Biophotonics. 2015;8:60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Wang Y, Wang D, Zhang Y, Geng J, Lovell JF, Xia J. Slit-enabled linear-array photoacoustic tomography with near isotropic spatial resolution in three dimensions. Opt Lett. 2016;41:127–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Wang Y, Wang D, Hubbell R, Xia J. Second generation slit-based photoacoustic tomography system for vascular imaging in human. J Biophotonics. 2017;10:799–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Plumb AA, Huynh NT, Guggenheim J, Zhang E, Beard P. Rapid volumetric photoacoustic tomographic imaging with a Fabry-Perot ultrasound sensor depicts peripheral arteries and microvascular vasomotor responses to thermal stimuli. Eur Radiol 2017; 1–9.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Vallet M, Varray F, Kalkhoran MA, Vray D, Boutet J. Enhancement of photoacoustic imaging quality by using CMUT technology: experimental study. In: 2014 IEEE International ultrasonics symposium (IUS); 2014. p. 1296–99.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ansari R, Zhang E, Desjardins AE, Beard PC. All-optical endoscopic probe for high resolution 3D photoacoustic tomography. Proc SPIE. 2017;10064:100641W.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Huynh N, Ogunlade O, Zhang E, Cox B, Beard P. Photoacoustic imaging using an 8-beam Fabry-Perot scanner. Proc. SPIE. 2016;9708:97082L.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Huynh N, Lucka F, Zhang E, Betcke M, Arridge S, Beard P, Cox B. Sub-sampled Fabry-Perot photoacoustic scanner for fast 3D imaging. Proc SPIE. 2017;10064:100641Y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Vallet M, Varray F, Boutet J, Dinten J-M, Caliano G, Savoia AS, Vray D. Quantitative comparison of PZT and CMUT probes for photoacoustic imaging: experimental validation. Photoacoustics. 2017;8:48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Warshavski O, Meynier C, Sénégond N, Chatain P, Rebling J, Razansky D, Felix N, Nguyen-Dinh A. Experimental evaluation of cMUT and PZT transducers in receive only mode for photoacoustic imaging. In: Proceedings of SPIE; 2016. p. 970830.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Medical and Biological Engineering and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical EngineeringPohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH)PohangRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Creative IT EngineeringPohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH)PohangRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations