Advertisement

A Comparative Analysis of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging Techniques

  • Andrea Trucco
  • Marco Crocco
  • Anastasis Kounoudes
  • Claudia Sciallero

Abstract

One of the most important issues in the field of ultrasound medical imaging using contrast agents is the development of techniques able to separate the response of contrast media from the response of biological tissues. In the literature, one can find various solutions concerning the use of multiple transmitted signals and the combination of the related echoes. Moreover, such multi-pulse techniques can be combined with a coded excitation in order to increase both the contrast to tissue ratio and the signal to noise ratio. The effectiveness of these techniques depends on many parameters concerning the medical ultrasound device and the physical scenario involved. In particular, some undesired effects always present in real conditions, like the signal distortion caused by the hardware equipment and by non-linear tissue propagation, the thermal noise, and the tissue movements can significantly reduce the theoretical performance. In this chapter a simulation tool is proposed that allows one to calculate the backscattered echo from a population of contrast agents immersed in a biological tissue, considering all the mentioned effects. With this tool, an assessment of the performance of a set of multi-pulse techniques has been carried out under realistic working conditions, showing that sharp differences occur among the techniques, depending on the specific setup considered.

Keywords

Simulation Tool Thermal Noise Beam Signal Ultrasound Contrast Agent Pulse Inversion 
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.
    Borsboom J, Chin CT and de Jong N (2004) Experimental Evaluation of a Nonlinear Coded Excitation Method for Contrast Imaging. Ultrasonics 42:671–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borsboom J, Chin CT, Bouakaz A, Versluis M and de Jong N (2005) Harmonic Chirp Imaging Method for Ultrasound Contrast Agent. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelect Freq Contr 52:241–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chiao RY and Hao X (2005) Coded Excitation for Diagnostic Ultrasound: a System Developer’s Perspective. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Contr 52:202–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cosgrove D (2006) Ultrasound Contrast Agents: An Overview. European Journal of Radiology 60:324–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crocco M, Palmese M, Sciallero C and Trucco A (2009) A Comparative Analysis of Multi-Pulse Techniques in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Medical Imaging. Ultrasonics 49:120–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crocco M, Pellegretti P, Sciallero C and Trucco A (2009) Combining Multi-Pulse Excitation and Chirp Coding in Contrast Enhanced Echographic Imaging. Measurement Science and Technology (submitted)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hamilton MF, Naze Tjotta J and Tjotta S (1985) Nonlinear Effects in the Farfield of a Directive Sound Source. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 78(1):202–216MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lurton X (2002) An Introduction to Underwater Acoustics: Principles and Applications. Springer Praxis Publishing, Chichester UKGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marmottant P, van der Meer S, Emmer M, Versluis M, de Jong N, Hilgenfeldt S and Lohse D (2005) A Model for Large Amplitude Oscillations of Coated Bubbles Accounting for Buckling and Rupture. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 118(6):3499–3505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Misaridis TX and Jensen JA (2005) Use of Modulation Excitation Signals in Ultrasound. Part I Basic Concepts and Expected Benefits. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelect Freq Contr 52:177–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Phillips P and Gardener E (2004) Contrast-Agent Detection and Quantification. Europ Radiol Suppl 14(8):4–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Phillips PJ (2001) Contrast Pulse Sequences (CPS): Imaging Nonlinear Microbubbles. 2001 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Atlanta, USA 2:1739–1745Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Skolnik M (2001) Introduction to Radar Systems 3rd edn. Mc Graw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stride N and Saffari N (2005) Investigating the Significance of Multiple Scattering in Ultrasound Contrast Agent Particle Populations. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control 52(12):2332–2345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sun Y, Kruse DE and Ferrara KW (2007) Contrast Imaging with Chirped Excitation. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelect Freq Contr 54:520–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Szabo TL (2004) Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging: Inside Out. Elsevier Academic Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Meer SM, Versluis M, Lohse D, Chin CT, Bouakaz A and de Jong N (2004) The Resonance Frequency of SonVueTM. 2004 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Montréal, Canada, pp. 343–345Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Trucco
    • 1
  • Marco Crocco
    • 1
  • Anastasis Kounoudes
    • 2
  • Claudia Sciallero
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Biophysical and Electronic EngineeringUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.SignalGeneriX LtdLimassolCyprus

Personalised recommendations