Literature DB >> 26112617

Conditionally Increased Acoustic Pressures in Nonfetal Diagnostic Ultrasound Examinations Without Contrast Agents: A Preliminary Assessment.

Kathryn R Nightingale1, Charles C Church2, Gerald Harris3, Keith A Wear4, Michael R Bailey5, Paul L Carson6, Hui Jiang7, Kurt L Sandstrom8, Thomas L Szabo9, Marvin C Ziskin10.   

Abstract

The mechanical index (MI) has been used by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) since 1992 for regulatory decisions regarding the acoustic output of diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Its formula is based on predictions of acoustic cavitation under specific conditions. Since its implementation over 2 decades ago, new imaging modes have been developed that employ unique beam sequences exploiting higher-order acoustic phenomena, and, concurrently, studies of the bioeffects of ultrasound under a range of imaging scenarios have been conducted. In 2012, the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Technical Standards Committee convened a working group of its Output Standards Subcommittee to examine and report on the potential risks and benefits of the use of conditionally increased acoustic pressures (CIP) under specific diagnostic imaging scenarios. The term "conditionally" is included to indicate that CIP would be considered on a per-patient basis for the duration required to obtain the necessary diagnostic information. This document is a result of that effort. In summary, a fundamental assumption in the MI calculation is the presence of a preexisting gas body. For tissues not known to contain preexisting gas bodies, based on theoretical predications and experimentally reported cavitation thresholds, we find this assumption to be invalid. We thus conclude that exceeding the recommended maximum MI level given in the FDA guidance could be warranted without concern for increased risk of cavitation in these tissues. However, there is limited literature assessing the potential clinical benefit of exceeding the MI guidelines in these tissues. The report proposes a 3-tiered approach for CIP that follows the model for employing elevated output in magnetic resonance imaging and concludes with summary recommendations to facilitate Institutional Review Board (IRB)-monitored clinical studies investigating CIP in specific tissues.
© 2015 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26112617      PMCID: PMC4822701          DOI: 10.7863/ultra.34.7.15.13.0001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Ultrasound Med        ISSN: 0278-4297            Impact factor:   2.153


  102 in total

Review 1.  Section 4--bioeffects in tissues with gas bodies. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.153

2.  Controlled tissue emulsification produced by high intensity focused ultrasound shock waves and millisecond boiling.

Authors:  Tatiana D Khokhlova; Michael S Canney; Vera A Khokhlova; Oleg A Sapozhnikov; Lawrence A Crum; Michael R Bailey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Gene expression profiling of rat fetuses exposed to 2-dimensional ultrasound.

Authors:  Zvonko Hocevar; Janez Rozman; Alja Videtic Paska; Robert Frangez; Tomaz Vaupotic; Petra Hudler
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.153

4.  Vascular effects induced by combined 1-MHz ultrasound and microbubble contrast agent treatments in vivo.

Authors:  Joo Ha Hwang; Andrew A Brayman; Michael A Reidy; Thomas J Matula; Michael B Kimmey; Lawrence A Crum
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 5.  Ultrasound-biophysics mechanisms.

Authors:  William D O'Brien
Journal:  Prog Biophys Mol Biol       Date:  2006-08-08       Impact factor: 3.667

Review 6.  The risk of exposure to diagnostic ultrasound in postnatal subjects: nonthermal mechanisms.

Authors:  Charles C Church; Edwin L Carstensen; Wesley L Nyborg; Paul L Carson; Leon A Frizzell; Michael R Bailey
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.153

7.  American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine consensus report on potential bioeffects of diagnostic ultrasound: executive summary.

Authors:  J Brian Fowlkes
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.153

8.  Incidence of cardiac arrhythmias with therapeutic versus diagnostic ultrasound and intravenous microbubbles.

Authors:  Scott Chapman; John Windle; Feng Xie; Anna McGrain; Thomas R Porter
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Effects on nonlinearity on the estimation of in situ values of acoustic output parameters.

Authors:  T L Szabo; F Clougherty; C Grossman
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  In vivo quantification of liver stiffness in a rat model of hepatic fibrosis with acoustic radiation force.

Authors:  Michael H Wang; Mark L Palmeri; Cynthia D Guy; Liu Yang; Laurence W Hedlund; Anna Mae Diehl; Kathryn R Nightingale
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2009-08-14       Impact factor: 2.998

View more
  23 in total

1.  Radiation Force as a Physical Mechanism for Ultrasonic Neurostimulation of the Ex Vivo Retina.

Authors:  Mike D Menz; Patrick Ye; Kamyar Firouzi; Amin Nikoozadeh; Kim Butts Pauly; Pierre Khuri-Yakub; Stephen A Baccus
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  Shock formation and nonlinear saturation effects in the ultrasound field of a diagnostic curvilinear probe.

Authors:  Maria M Karzova; Petr V Yuldashev; Oleg A Sapozhnikov; Vera A Khokhlova; Bryan W Cunitz; Wayne Kreider; Michael R Bailey
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Dependence of inertial cavitation induced by high intensity focused ultrasound on transducer F-number and nonlinear waveform distortion.

Authors:  Tatiana Khokhlova; Pavel Rosnitskiy; Christopher Hunter; Adam Maxwell; Wayne Kreider; Gail Ter Haar; Marcia Costa; Oleg Sapozhnikov; Vera Khokhlova
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Quantifying Image Quality Improvement Using Elevated Acoustic Output in B-Mode Harmonic Imaging.

Authors:  Yufeng Deng; Mark L Palmeri; Ned C Rouze; Gregg E Trahey; Clare M Haystead; Kathryn R Nightingale
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 2.998

5.  Wideband acoustic activation and detection of droplet vaporization events using a capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer.

Authors:  Anthony Novell; Christopher B Arena; Omer Oralkan; Paul A Dayton
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Simulation of nonlinear trans-skull focusing and formation of shocks in brain using a fully populated ultrasound array with aberration correction.

Authors:  Pavel B Rosnitskiy; Petr V Yuldashev; Oleg A Sapozhnikov; Leonid R Gavrilov; Vera A Khokhlova
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Detecting Kidney Stones Using Twinkling Artifacts: Survey of Kidney Stones with Varying Composition and Size.

Authors:  Benjamin G Wood; Matthew W Urban
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Ultrasound Elicits Behavioral Responses through Mechanical Effects on Neurons and Ion Channels in a Simple Nervous System.

Authors:  Jan Kubanek; Poojan Shukla; Alakananda Das; Stephen A Baccus; Miriam B Goodman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-02-20       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Pulmonary Capillary Hemorrhage Induced by Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse Shear Wave Elastography in Ventilated Rats.

Authors:  Douglas L Miller; Zhihong Dong; Chunyan Dou; Brandon Patterson; Krishnan Raghavendran
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 2.153

10.  Evaluating the Benefit of Elevated Acoustic Output in Harmonic Motion Estimation in Ultrasonic Shear Wave Elasticity Imaging.

Authors:  Yufeng Deng; Mark L Palmeri; Ned C Rouze; Clare M Haystead; Kathryn R Nightingale
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 2.998

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.