Advertisement

Non-Thermal Effects of Ultrasound on Intact Animal Tissues

  • K. J. W. Taylor
  • M. Dyson

Abstract

Investigations on the effects of ultrasound on intact animal tissues are complicated by mutual interaction between the ultrasound beam and the tissue. Most of the reported biological effects may be ascribed to either heat or cavitation. There remain a number of phenomena that are apparently due to other mechanisms although it is particularly difficult to completely exclude all possibility of cavitation. These effects include destructive changes in the central nervous system resulting in ‘focal’ brain lesions, and spinal cord injury resulting in paraplegia. Pulsed insonation of both liver and spinal cord produces vascular damage and this occurs more easily in the presence of hypoxia. There is evidence of dose accumulation in the production of these changes.

Stimulation of tissue regeneration by low intensity insonation rationalises a therapeutic use of ultrasound. There is evidence that this is a non-thermal effect. Occurrence of red cell stasis has relevance to the use of the energy form for measuring blood velocity since standing waves may easily occur in vivo.

Finally, the effects of ultrasound on developing chick embryos are reported. Continuous insonation with Doppler devices did not affect their subsequent development. When delivery of energy was pulsed, relatively long pulses (20 us) at a high p.r.f. (5000 s−1) produced perverted development if applied during the early stages of organogenesis. An intensity threshold for this effect was found between 10 and 25 W cm−1. Embryos at later stages of development were unaffected even by intensities as high as 100 W cm−2. The results indicate a large margin of safety for the dose-parameters used in current applications.

Keywords

Chick Embryo Intact Tissue Standing Wave Field Cavitation Threshold Doppler Device 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Basauri, L. and Lele, P.P.: A simple method for production of trackless focal lesions with focussed ultrasound. J. Physiol. 160 (1962) 513.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bell, E.: The action of ultrasound on the mouse liver. J. Cell Comp. Physiol. 50 (1957) 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Curtis, J.C.: Hepatic injury produced by intense ultrasound. Sci. Proc. 7th Ann. Mtg. A.I.U.M. (1963) 30.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Curtis, J.C.: Action of intense ultrasound on intact mouse liver. In “Ultrasonic Energy” ed. Elizabeth Kelly, Urbana, Ill. (1965) 85.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dunn, F. and Fry, F.J.: Ultrasonic threshold doses for the mammalian central nervous system. Trans. Biomed. Eng., BME 18 (1971) 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dyson, M., Pond, J.B., Joseph, J. and Warwick, R.: The stimulation of tissue regeneration by means of ultrasound. Clin. Sci. 35 (1968) 273.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dyson, M., Pond, J.B., Joseph, J. and Warwick, R.: Stimulation of tissue regeneration by pulsed, plane wave ultrasound. IEEE Trans. Sonics & Ultrasonics, Su-17 (1970) 133.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dyson, M., Pond, J.B. and Woodward, B.: Flow of red blood cells stopped by ultrasound. Nature (Lond) 232 (1971) 572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dyson, M., Pond, J.B., Woodward, B. and Broadbent, J. The production of blood cell stasis and endothelial damage in the blood vessels of chick embryos treated with ultrasound in a stationary wave field. Ultrasound in Med. Biol, 1 (1974) 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fry, W.J. and Dunn, F.: In “Physical Techniques in Biological Research” ed. W.L. Nastuk, Acad. Press Inc., New York, 4 (1962) 261.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fry, W.J., Tucker, D., Fry, F.J. and Wulff, V.J.: Physical factors involved in ultrasonically induced changes in living systems. II. Amplitude duration relations and the effect of hydrostatic pressure for nerve tissue. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 23 (1951) 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fry, W.J., Wulff, W.J., Tucker, D. and Fry, F.J.: Physical factors involved in ultrasonically induced changes in living systems. I. Identification of non-temperature effects. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 22 (1950) 867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Galitsky, A.B. and Levina, S.I.: Vascular origin of trophic ulcers and application of ultrasound as pre-operative treatment to plastic surgery. Acta Chirug. Plast. 6 (1964) 271.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill, C.R.: Acoustic intensity measurements on ultrasonic diagnostic devices. In “Ultrasonographia Medica” ed. J. Bock and K. Ossoinig, Vienna Acad. Med. (1970) 21.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hill, C.R.: Ultrasonic exposure thresholds for changes in cells and tissues. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 52 (1972) 667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hill, C.R., Clarke, P.R., Crowe, M.R. and Hammick, J.W.: Biophysical effects of cavitation in a 1 MHz ultrasonic beam. Ultrasonics for Industry Conference Papers (1969) 26.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hill, C.R. and Joshi, G.P.: The significance of cavitation in interpreting the biological effects of ultrasound. Proc. Conference UbioMed-70, Polish Acad. Sci. (1970).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pond, J.B.: A study of the biological action of focussed mechanical waves (focussed ultrasound). Ph.D. Thesis (1968) Univ. of London.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pond, J.B,: The role of heat in the production of ultrasonic focal lesions. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 47 (1970) 1607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Selman, G.G. and Counce, S.J.: Abnormal embryonic development in Drosophila induced by ultrasonic treatment. Nature (Lond) 172 (1953) 503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shealey, C.N. and Henneman, E.: Revisible effects of ultrasound on spinal reflex. Arch. Neurol. (Chicago) 6 (1962) 374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shoji, R., Momma, E., Shimizu, T. and Matsuda, S.: An experimental study on the effect of low intensity ultrasound on developing mouse embryos. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ. Series VI, Zool. 18 (1971) 51.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Taylor, K.J.W.: Ultrasonic damage to spinal cord and the synergistic effect of hypoxia. J. Path. 102 (1970) 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Connolly, C.C.: Differing hepatic lesions caused by the same dose of ultrasound. J. Path. 98 (1969) 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Dyson, M.: Possible hazards of diagnostic ultrasound. Brit. J. Hosp. Med. 8 (1972) 571.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Dyson, M.: Toxicity studies on the interaction of ultrasound on embryonic and adult tissues. Proc. 2nd World Congress on Ultrasonics in Medicine, 1973. Excerpta Med. (In Press).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Pond, J.B.: The effects of ultrasound of varying frequencies on rat liver. J. Path. 100 (1970) 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Pond, J.B.: A study of the production of haemorrhagic injury and paraplegia in rat spinal cord by pulsed ultrasound of low megaHertz frequencies in the context of the safety for clinical usage. Brit. J. Radiol 45 (1972a) 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Pond, J.B.: Primary sites of ultrasonic damage on cell systems. In “Interaction of Ultrasound and Biological Tissues” ed. J.M. Reid and M.R. Sikov, DHEW Publication (FDA) 73-8008 BRH/DBE 73-1 (1972b) 87.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Taylor, K.J.W. and Pond, J.B.: Experimental ultrasonic injury and safety limits in its use. Acta Radiol. 13 (1972c) 743.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. J. W. Taylor
    • 1
  • M. Dyson
    • 2
  1. 1.Royal Marsden HospitalSutton, SurreyUK
  2. 2.Guy’s Hospital Medical SchoolLondonUK

Personalised recommendations