Literature DB >> 26627816

Accuracy of a bistatic scattering substitution technique for calibration of focused receivers.

Kyle T Rich1, T Douglas Mast1.   

Abstract

A recent method for calibrating single-element, focused passive cavitation detectors (PCD) compares bistatic scattering measurements by the PCD and a reference hydrophone. Here, effects of scatterer properties and PCD size on frequency-dependent receive calibration accuracy are investigated. Simulated scattering from silica and polystyrene spheres was compared for small hydrophone and spherically focused PCD receivers to assess the achievable calibration accuracy as a function of frequency, scatterer size, and PCD size. Good agreement between measurements was found when the scatterer diameter was sufficiently smaller than the focal beamwidth of the PCD; this relationship was dependent on the scatterer material. For conditions that result in significant disagreement between measurements, the numerical methods described here can be used to correct experimental calibrations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26627816      PMCID: PMC4636500          DOI: 10.1121/1.4935080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  7 in total

1.  Quantitative observations of cavitation activity in a viscoelastic medium.

Authors:  Jamie R T Collin; Constantin C Coussios
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Determination of postexcitation thresholds for single ultrasound contrast agent microbubbles using double passive cavitation detection.

Authors:  Daniel A King; Michael J Malloy; Alayna C Roberts; Alexander Haak; Christian C Yoder; William D O'Brien
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Methods to calibrate the absolute receive sensitivity of single-element, focused transducers.

Authors:  Kyle T Rich; T Douglas Mast
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 1.840

4.  Absolute measurement of ultrasonic backscatter from single microbubbles.

Authors:  Vassilis Sboros; Stepher D Pye; Calum A Macdonald; Jaganathan Gomatam; Carmel M Moran; William N McDicken
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 5.  Role of acoustic cavitation in the delivery and monitoring of cancer treatment by high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU).

Authors:  C C Coussios; C H Farny; G Ter Haar; R A Roy
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 3.914

Review 6.  Ultrasound, cavitation bubbles and their interaction with cells.

Authors:  Junru Wu; Wesley L Nyborg
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2008-04-08       Impact factor: 15.470

7.  Ultrasound-enhanced rt-PA thrombolysis in an ex vivo porcine carotid artery model.

Authors:  Kathryn E Hitchcock; Nikolas M Ivancevich; Kevin J Haworth; Danielle N Caudell Stamper; Deborah C Vela; Jonathan T Sutton; Gail J Pyne-Geithman; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 2.998

  7 in total
  3 in total

1.  Characterization of cavitation-radiated acoustic power using diffraction correction.

Authors:  Kyle T Rich; Christy K Holland; Marepalli B Rao; T Douglas Mast
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 2.  For Whom the Bubble Grows: Physical Principles of Bubble Nucleation and Dynamics in Histotripsy Ultrasound Therapy.

Authors:  Kenneth B Bader; Eli Vlaisavljevich; Adam D Maxwell
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 2.998

3.  Quantitative Frequency-Domain Passive Cavitation Imaging.

Authors:  Kevin J Haworth; Kenneth B Bader; Kyle T Rich; Christy K Holland; T Douglas Mast
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 2.725

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.