Ultrasound Backscatter of Liver with Particulate Contrast Agents

  • T. A. Tuthill
  • R. B. Baggs
  • M. R. Violante
  • K. J. Parker
Conference paper

Abstract

A solid-particle contrast agent in liver has provided some encouraging initial results [7, 8]. Iodipamide ethyl ester (IDE) can be formulated with a narrow diameter distribution about a mean which can be selected within the range of 0.1–2.0 µm.The particles can be prepared under sterile conditions, are stable over time, and do not clump in the blood after intravenous injection. The circulating particles are then captured by the Kupffer’s cells which line the sinusoids of normal liver, and the IDE is eliminated within 2 days. The high density (2.4g/cm3) of these particles compared to surrounding tissue (1.0–1.1 g/cm3) produces an impedance mismatch which is responsible for backscatter enhancement. Since tumors and other lesions lack Kupffer’s cells, they do not concentrate the particles and therefore lack contrast effects compared to surrounding normal tissue. In previous work we have reported some of the ultrasonic properties ex vivo of liver with IDE [7], and imaging results in vivo of rabbit liver implanted with VX2 carcinomas [8]. This paper describes the measurement of ultrasonic backscatter in rabbit liver with standard IDE particles and with a newly formulated bubble-IDE particle. The changes in backscatter due to IDE uptake are related to those predicted by simple theory. The influence of biodistribution is examined. The results elucidate some of the underlying mechanisms of ultrasound propagation through normal liver and also underscore the importance of biodistribution in determining the ultrasonic effects of contrast agents.

Keywords

Toxicity Ethyl Anisotropy Gelatin Compressibility 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bamber JC, Hill CR, King JA (1981) Acoustic properties of normal and cancerous human liver. II. Dependence on tissue structure. Ultrasound Med Biol 7: 135–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lauteala L, Komano M,Violante M (1984) Effect of IV administered IDE particles on rat liver morphology. Invest Radiol 19: 133–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lowe H, Bamber JC, Webb S, Cook-Martin G (1988) Perceptual studies of contrast, texture, and detail in ultrasound B-scans. SPIE Med Imaging II 914: 40–47Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Morse PM, Ingard KU (1968) Theoretical acoustics. McGraw-Hill, New York, p 427Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mottley JG, Miller JG (1988) Anisotropy of ultrasound backscatter of myocardial tissue. I. Theory and measurements in vitro. J Acoust Soc Am 83: 755–761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ophir J, Parker KJ (1989) Contrast agents in diagnostic ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol 15: 319–333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parker KJ,Tuthill TA, Lerner RM,Violante MR (1987) A particulate contrast agent with potential for ultrasound imaging of liver. Ultrasound Med Biol 13: 555–566PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parker KJ, Baggs RB, Lerner RM,Tuthill TA,Violante MR (1990) Ultrasound contrast for hepatic tumors using IDE particles. Invest Radiol 25: 1135–1139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sleyster EC, Knook DL (1982) Relation between localization and function of rat liver Kupffer cells. Lab Invest 47: 484–490PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sperry RH, Parker KJ (1991) Segmentation of speckle images based on level crossing statistics. J Opt Soc Am [A] 8 (3): 490–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tuthill TA, Sperry RH, Parker KJ (1988) Deviations from Rayleigh statistics in ultrasonic speckle. Ultrason Imaging 10: 81–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Waag RC, Nilsson JO, Astheimer JP (1983) Characterization of volume scattering power spectra in isotropic media from power spectra of scattering by planes. J Acoust Soc Am 74: 1555–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wake K, Decker K, Kirn A, Knook DL, McCuskey RS, Bouwens L,Wisse E (1989) Cell biology and kinetics of Kupffer cells in the liver. Int Rev Cytol 118: 173–229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. A. Tuthill
  • R. B. Baggs
  • M. R. Violante
  • K. J. Parker

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations