Skip to main content

Bioeffects and Safety

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1620 Accesses

Part of the book series: Current Clinical Urology ((CCU))

Abstract

Urologists who perform and interpret ultrasound in their office must have a thorough knowledge of the potential bioeffects of ultrasound in human tissues and how to maintain the ultrasound equipment to protect patient safety. Diagnostic ultrasound transmits energy into the patient which has the potential to produce biological effects. The maximum output of ultrasound energy by ultrasound devices is regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) [1]. In general, these regulations allow enough energy to accomplish diagnostic goals but prescribe a margin of safety. The total energy imparted during an ultrasound examination is controlled by the operator through (1) acoustic output, (2) selection of frequency, (3) mode of ultrasound, (4) technique, and (5) duration of the examination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Guidance for industry and FDA staff-information for manufacturers seeking marketing clearance of ­diagnostic ultrasound systems and transducers. Document issued on 9 Sept 2008. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ucm070856.htm.

  2. Bioeffects Committee of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine consensus report on potential bioeffects of diagnostic ultrasound: executive summary. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:503–15.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Susani M, Madersbacher S, Kratzik C, Vingers L, Marberger M. Morphology of tissue destruction induced by focused ultrasound. Eur Urol. 1993;23 Suppl 1:34–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW. Diagnostic ultrasound. 3rd ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2005 (Ch. 2, Page 37).

    Google Scholar 

  5. O’Brien WD, Deng CS, Harris GR, Herman BA, Merritt CR, Sanghvi N, et al. The risk of exposure to diagnostic ultrasound in postnatal subjects: thermal effects. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:517–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Church CC, Carstensen EL, Nyborg WL, Carson PL, Frizzell LA, Bailey MR. The risk of exposure to diagnostic ultrasound in postnatal subjects: nonthermal mechanisms. J Ultrasound Med. 2008;27:565–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nelson TR, Fowlkes JB, Abramowicz JS, Church CC. Ultrasound biosafety considerations for the practicing sonographer and sinologist. J Ultrasound Med. 2009; 18:139–50.

    Google Scholar 

  8. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. How to interpret the ultrasound output display standard for higher acoustic output diagnostic ultrasound devices: version 2 [technical bulletin]. J Ultrasound Med. 2004;23:723–6.

    Google Scholar 

  9. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Official Statement on Prudent Use Clinical Safety. April 2012. http://www.aium.org/resources/statements.aspx Accessed 29 Jan 2013.

  10. United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration: Hospital eTool, Clinical services sonography. http://www.osha.gov/dcsp/products/etools/hospital/sonography/sonography.html.

  11. Makary MA, Epstein J, Pronovost PJ, Millman EA, Hartmann EC, Freischlag JA. Surgical specimen identification errors: a new measure of quality in surgical care. Surgery. 2007;141(4):450–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Routine quality assurance for diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Published by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine; 2008. http://www.aium.org.

  13. Rutala WA, Weber DJ, The Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC).Guidelines for disinfection and sterilization in healthcare facilities; 2008. http://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/pdf/guidelines/Disinfection_Nov_2008.pdf Accessed 29 Jan 2013.

  14. FDA public health notification: reprocessing of reusable ultrasound transducer assemblies used for biopsy procedures; 2006. http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/safety/alertsandnotices/publichealthnotifications/ucm062086 Accessed 22 June 2006.

  15. AIUM Guidelines for Cleaning and Preparing Endocavitary Ultrasound Transducers Between Patients. Approved June 4, 2003. http://www.aium.org/resources/statements.asp.xAccessed 29 Jan 2013.

  16. FDA-cleared sterilants and high level disinfectants with general claims for processing reusable medical and dental devices, March 2009. http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/ReprocessingofSingle-UseDevices/ucm133514.htm.

  17. ANSI/AAMI ST58:1005(R)2010. Chemical sterilization and high level disinfection in health care ­facilities. Developed by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. Approved by the American National Standards Institute.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pat F. Fulgham MD, FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fulgham, P.F. (2013). Bioeffects and Safety. In: Fulgham, P., Gilbert, B. (eds) Practical Urological Ultrasound. Current Clinical Urology. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-351-6_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-351-6_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-602-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-351-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics