Literature DB >> 19605664

US artifacts.

Myra K Feldman1, Sanjeev Katyal, Margaret S Blackwood.   

Abstract

Image artifacts are commonly encountered in clinical ultrasonography (US) and may be a source of confusion for the interpreting physician. Some artifacts may be avoidable and arise secondary to improper scanning technique. Other artifacts are generated by the physical limitations of the modality. US artifacts can be understood with a basic appreciation of the physical properties of the ultrasound beam, the propagation of sound in matter, and the assumptions of image processing. US artifacts arise secondary to errors inherent to the ultrasound beam characteristics, the presence of multiple echo paths, velocity errors, and attenuation errors. The beam width, side lobe, reverberation, comet tail, ring-down, mirror image, speed displacement, refraction, attenuation, shadowing, and increased through-transmission artifacts are encountered routinely in clinical practice. Recognition of these artifacts is important because they may be clues to tissue composition and aid in diagnosis. The ability to recognize and remedy potentially correctable US artifacts is important for image quality improvement and optimal patient care. Copyright RSNA, 2009

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19605664     DOI: 10.1148/rg.294085199

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiographics        ISSN: 0271-5333            Impact factor:   5.333


  42 in total

Review 1.  Ultrasound of the pediatric chest.

Authors:  Andrew Mong; Monica Epelman; Kassa Darge
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-04-20

2.  Searchlight phenomenon: a novel artifact of the gallbladder.

Authors:  Hiroko Naganuma; Hiroshi Nagai; Hideaki Ishida
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2016-01-09       Impact factor: 1.314

3.  Comet-tail artefacts and abdominal pain: radiological mistake or an underestimated event?

Authors:  Paola Marchetti; Francesco De Peppo; Emanuela Ceriati; Ottavio Adorisio
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2013-06-12

4.  Intensive care ultrasound: I. Physics, equipment, and image quality.

Authors:  Rita N Bakhru; William D Schweickert
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2013-10

Review 5.  Ultrasound of the pediatric chest.

Authors:  Priscilla Joshi; Aishvarya Vasishta; Mayank Gupta
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Feasibility assessment for successfully visualizing the fetal heart utilizing spatiotemporal image correlation.

Authors:  Eisuke Inubashiri; Sayuri Tatedo; Naomi Nishiyama; Hiina Minami; Yukio Watanabe; Noriyuki Akutagawa; Katumaru Kuroki; Masaki Sugawara; Nobuhiko Maeda; Keiji Haseyama
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2017-08-23       Impact factor: 1.314

7.  Bladder debris on renal and bladder ultrasound: A significant predictor of positive urine culture.

Authors:  Joseph W McQuaid; Michael P Kurtz; Tanya Logvinenko; Caleb P Nelson
Journal:  J Pediatr Urol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 1.830

8.  Mirror artifacts in obstetric ultrasound: case presentation of a ghost twin during the second-trimester ultrasound scan.

Authors:  Hyunyoung Ahn; Edgar Hernández-Andrade; Roberto Romero; Manasi Ptwardhan; Luis F Goncalves; Alma Aurioles-Garibay; Maynor Garcia; Sonia S Hassan; Lami Yeo
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 2.587

9.  Intravascular ultrasound assessment of the effects of rotational atherectomy in calcified coronary artery lesions.

Authors:  Sung Sik Kim; Myong Hwa Yamamoto; Akiko Maehara; Novalia Sidik; Kohei Koyama; Colin Berry; Keith G Oldroyd; Gary S Mintz; Margaret McEntegart
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 2.357

10.  Accurate high-resolution measurements of 3-D tissue dynamics with registration-enhanced displacement encoded MRI.

Authors:  Arnold D Gomez; Samer S Merchant; Edward W Hsu
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 10.048

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.