4.7 Article

Passive Acoustic Mapping with the Angular Spectrum Method

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MEDICAL IMAGING
卷 36, 期 4, 页码 983-993

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2016.2643565

关键词

Acoustic cavitation; focused ultrasound; image guided therapy; passive acoustic mapping

资金

  1. NIH [R00 EB016971-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present proof of principle study, we evaluated the homogenous angular spectrum method for passive acoustic mapping (AS-PAM) of microbubble oscillations using simulated and experimental data. In the simulated data we assessed the ability of AS-PAM to form 3D maps of a single and multiple point sources. Then, in the two dimensional limit, we compared the 2D maps from AS-PAM with alternative frequency and time domain passive acoustic mapping (FD-and TD-PAM) approaches. Finally, we assessed the ability of AS-PAM to visualize microbubble activity in vivo with data obtained during 8 different experiments of FUS-induced blood-brain barrier disruption in 3 nonhuman primates, using a clinical MRguided FUS system. Our in silico results demonstrate ASPAM can be used to perform 3D passive acoustic mapping. 2D AS-PAM as compared to FD-PAM and TD-PAM is 10 and 200 times faster respectively and has similar sensitivity, resolution, and localization accuracy, even when the noise was 10-fold higher than the signal. In-vivo, the AS-PAMreconstructions of emissions at frequency bands pertinent to the different types of microbubble oscillations were also found to be more sensitive than TD-PAM. AS-PAM of harmonic-only components predicted safe blood-brain barrier disruption, whereas AS-PAM of broadbandemissions correctly identifiedMR-evident tissue damage. The disparity (3.2 mm) in the location of the cavitation activity between the three methods was within their resolution limits. These data clearly demonstrate that ASPAMis a sensitiveand fast approachfor PAM, thus providing a clinically relevantmethod to guide therapeutic ultrasound procedures.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据