• DocumentCode
    2480924
  • Title

    P5B-10 Single Microbubble Acoustics with Signal Processing: Initial Experience with Amplitude Modulated Pulse Sequences

  • Author

    Thomas, D.H. ; Butler, M.B. ; Anderson, T. ; McDicken, W.N. ; Sboros, V.

  • Author_Institution
    Univ. of Edinburgh, Edinburgh
  • fYear
    2007
  • fDate
    28-31 Oct. 2007
  • Firstpage
    2223
  • Lastpage
    2226
  • Abstract
    The study of acoustic scattering by single microbubble has the potential to offer improved signal processing techniques. A hydrodynamically focused flow was used in a phantom to isolate and detect single microbubbles´ RF signals using a commercial scanner (Sonos5500, Philips Medical Systems). Two different microbubbles in terms of shell and gas formulation, namely Definityreg and biSpherereg, are investigated using amplitude modulated pulse sequences. Each microbubble was subjected to a sequence of three 6-cycle amplitude modulated pulses. In each sequence the middle pulse was twice the amplitude of the first and last pulses (half, full half). At 1.62 MHz and insonating with low acoustic pressures (full pulse peak negative pressure equal to 180 kPa) both agents generally responded proportionally to each of the half, full and half amplitude transmitted pulses. A small percentage of microbubbles (approx. 10%) did not respond to the first half amplitude pulse. At larger amplitudes (full pulse peak negative pressure equal to 550 kPa) the majority of microbubbles (approx. 90%) did not produce a measurable echo from the first half amplitude pulse. Mean RMS echo amplitudes at the second harmonic for this dominant population for Definityreg were 0, 5.5plusmn3.3, 5.7plusmn3.5 Pascals, and for biSpherereg 0, 1.1plusmn0.8, 1.1plusmn0.9 Pascals in response to the 275-550-275 kPa sequence. The lack of response to the first 275 kPa pulses is in agreement with previous findings that demonstrate that the number of microbubbles that scatter increases with acoustic pressure, but may be attributed to different effects for the two agents such as off-resonant size response at the large pressure for Definityreg and pressure dependant shell damage for biSpherereg. Whilst pulse amplitude modulation is effective in rejecting linear tissue signals and enhancing nonlinear microbubble signals at low acoustic pressures, it does - not use the full microbubble signal at larger pressures. More complex pulsing regimes need to be designed to achieve this in the future.
  • Keywords
    acoustic signal processing; acoustic wave scattering; aeroacoustics; biological tissues; bubbles; hydrodynamics; phantoms; pulse amplitude modulation; Definity; Philips Medical Systems; Sonos5500; acoustic pressure; acoustic scattering; amplitude modulated pulse sequences; biSphere; frequency 1.62 MHz; hydrodynamically focused flow; linear tissue signal rejection; off-resonant size response; phantom; pressure dependant shell damage; pulse amplitude modulation; second harmonics; signal processing; single microbubble acoustics; Acoustic pulses; Acoustic scattering; Acoustic signal detection; Acoustic signal processing; Amplitude modulation; Imaging phantoms; Medical signal detection; Pressure measurement; Pulse measurements; Pulse modulation;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Ultrasonics Symposium, 2007. IEEE
  • Conference_Location
    New York, NY
  • ISSN
    1051-0117
  • Print_ISBN
    978-1-4244-1384-3
  • Electronic_ISBN
    1051-0117
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/ULTSYM.2007.559
  • Filename
    4410132