Literature DB >> 27278589

Comparison of ultrasound speed in articular cartilage measured by different time-of-flight methods.

Satoru Ohashi1, Isao Ohnishi2, Takuya Matsumoto2, Juntaro Matsuyama2, Masahiko Bessho2, Kenji Tobita2, Masako Kaneko2, Kozo Nakamura2.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether different time-of-flight (TOF) methods including amplitude-related methods, which determine tissue borders from the reflected wave itself, and the cross-correlation method, which requires reference signals to determine borders, influence speed of sound (SOS) values for articular cartilage. Left femoral condyle samples from a 6-month-old pig and a 3-year-old pig were used. Radiofrequency signals from the cartilage surface and cartilage-bone interface were acquired using the ultrasound transducer for nine points in each sample. TOF was calculated by three amplitude-related methods (peak amplitude, peak envelope, signal phase) and a cross-correlation method. Cartilage thickness was measured microscopically, and SOS was calculated at each point. Mean (± standard deviation) SOSs in cartilage from the 9-point measurement by the four TOF methods were 1488 ± 51, 1488 ± 48, 1487 ± 54, and 1466 ± 51 m/s (for peak amplitude, peak envelope, signal phase, and cross-correlation methods, respectively) for the 6-month-old pig, and 1709 ± 107, 1717 ± 104, 1713 ± 105, and 1695 ± 138 m/s, respectively, for the 3-year-old pig. Paired t testing identified no significant differences between the amplitude-related methods and the cross-correlation method, although SOS values yielded by the amplitude-related methods tended to be higher than those from the cross-correlation method. These results suggest that amplitude-related methods of TOF measurement and the cross-correlation method are equivalently applicable to articular cartilage SOS measurement when a wave is clearly reflected from cartilage. TOF methods should thus be considered in studies on SOS measurement.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Articular cartilage; Cartilage thickness; Time-of-flight method; Ultrasound speed

Year:  2011        PMID: 27278589     DOI: 10.1007/s10396-011-0317-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)        ISSN: 1346-4523            Impact factor:   1.314


  33 in total

1.  Comment on 'ultrasonic measurement of the thickness of human articular cartilage in situ' by Yao and Seedhom.

Authors:  R W Mann
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 7.580

2.  Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis.

Authors:  J H KELLGREN; J S LAWRENCE
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1957-12       Impact factor: 19.103

Review 3.  Biomedical signal processing (in four parts). Part 1. Time-domain methods.

Authors:  R E Challis; R I Kitney
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  Assessment of rat articular cartilage maturation using 50-MHz quantitative ultrasonography.

Authors:  E Chérin; A Saïed; B Pellaumail; D Loeuille; P Laugier; P Gillet; P Netter; G Berger
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 6.576

5.  Acoustic properties of articular cartilage under mechanical stress.

Authors:  Heikki J Nieminen; Juha Töyräs; Mikko S Laasanen; Jukka S Jurvelin
Journal:  Biorheology       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.875

6.  Quantitative assessment of surface roughness using backscattered ultrasound: the effects of finite surface curvature.

Authors:  E H Chiang; R S Adler; C R Meyer; J M Rubin; D K Dedrick; T J Laing
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  Real-time ultrasound analysis of articular cartilage degradation in vitro.

Authors:  Heikki J Nieminen; Juha Töyräs; Jarno Rieppo; Miika T Nieminen; Jani Hirvonen; Rami Korhonen; Jukka S Jurvelin
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Sonographic evaluation of the cartilage of the knee.

Authors:  A M Aisen; W J McCune; A MacGuire; P L Carson; T M Silver; S Z Jafri; W Martel
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Precision of 3.0 Tesla quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage morphology in a multicentre clinical trial.

Authors:  F Eckstein; R J Buck; D Burstein; H C Charles; J Crim; M Hudelmaier; D J Hunter; G Hutchins; C Jackson; V Byers Kraus; N E Lane; T M Link; L S Majumdar; S Mazzuca; P V Prasad; T J Schnitzer; M S Taljanovic; A Vaz; B Wyman; M-P Hellio Le Graverand
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2008-02-18       Impact factor: 19.103

10.  Relation between ventricular fibrillation voltage and probability of defibrillation shocks. Analysis using Hilbert transforms.

Authors:  A Patwardhan; S Moghe; K Wang; H Cruise; F Leonelli
Journal:  J Electrocardiol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.438

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.