Assessment of ultrasound image quality in a reference phantom using gel and liquid standoff pads

Catherine Paverd , Alexander Martin , Marga Rominger , Lisa Ruby
{"title":"Assessment of ultrasound image quality in a reference phantom using gel and liquid standoff pads","authors":"Catherine Paverd ,&nbsp;Alexander Martin ,&nbsp;Marga Rominger ,&nbsp;Lisa Ruby","doi":"10.1016/j.wfumbo.2024.100051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>and Methods: This paper presents a review of image quality in ultrasound imaging when using gel and liquid standoff pads, compared to imaging without a standoff pad. Imaging metrics assessed are lateral resolution, nearfield target intensity, and contrast to noise ratio of echogenicity targets. Measurements were made with a Canon Aplio i800 ultrasound system on a standardized ultrasound phantom (Computerized Imaging Reference Systems, Inc.), and custom-made agarose phantoms. Two cases are examined: when the ultrasound images are taken with the probe at different heights above the phantom (the normal clinical use-case for standoff pads); and when the ultrasound probe is artificially always placed at the same height above the phantom (allowing for direct image comparison).</p></div><div><h3>Results and conclusion</h3><p>The main differences in the standard clinical use-case were observed in nearfield image intensity, with a mean difference of 22.4 ± 11.1 % between highest and lowest positions. Investigation of probes at the same height above the phantom shows that differences appear to be due primarily due to the height of the probe above the phantom, rather than the pads themselves. Elevational beamwidth was found to be a minimum of 2.2 mm at 25 mm axial depth, and adding a standoff pad can change vessel and cyst visualization due to the elevational beamwidth. This is a useful result to be aware of for clinicians using standoff pads on modern ultrasound systems.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101281,"journal":{"name":"WFUMB Ultrasound Open","volume":"2 2","pages":"Article 100051"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668324000193/pdfft?md5=285c2f529ffa468781058da53ccb26e2&pid=1-s2.0-S2949668324000193-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WFUMB Ultrasound Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949668324000193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

and Methods: This paper presents a review of image quality in ultrasound imaging when using gel and liquid standoff pads, compared to imaging without a standoff pad. Imaging metrics assessed are lateral resolution, nearfield target intensity, and contrast to noise ratio of echogenicity targets. Measurements were made with a Canon Aplio i800 ultrasound system on a standardized ultrasound phantom (Computerized Imaging Reference Systems, Inc.), and custom-made agarose phantoms. Two cases are examined: when the ultrasound images are taken with the probe at different heights above the phantom (the normal clinical use-case for standoff pads); and when the ultrasound probe is artificially always placed at the same height above the phantom (allowing for direct image comparison).

Results and conclusion

The main differences in the standard clinical use-case were observed in nearfield image intensity, with a mean difference of 22.4 ± 11.1 % between highest and lowest positions. Investigation of probes at the same height above the phantom shows that differences appear to be due primarily due to the height of the probe above the phantom, rather than the pads themselves. Elevational beamwidth was found to be a minimum of 2.2 mm at 25 mm axial depth, and adding a standoff pad can change vessel and cyst visualization due to the elevational beamwidth. This is a useful result to be aware of for clinicians using standoff pads on modern ultrasound systems.

使用凝胶和液体支承垫评估参考模型中的超声图像质量
背景与方法:本文对使用凝胶和液体隔离垫与不使用隔离垫进行超声成像时的图像质量进行了比较。评估的成像指标包括横向分辨率、近场目标强度和回声目标的对比度与噪声比。测量是使用佳能 Aplio i800 超声系统在标准超声模型(计算机成像参考系统公司)和定制的琼脂糖模型上进行的。对两种情况进行了研究:当探头位于假体上方不同高度时拍摄超声波图像(通常临床上使用间距垫的情况);以及当超声波探头被人为地始终置于假体上方相同高度时拍摄超声波图像(可直接进行图像比较)。结果和结论标准临床使用情况下的主要差异体现在近场图像强度上,最高和最低位置之间的平均差异为 22.4 ± 11.1%。对位于人体模型上方相同高度的探头进行的调查显示,差异似乎主要是由于探头位于人体模型上方的高度而非垫子本身造成的。研究发现,在 25 毫米轴向深度时,仰角波束宽度最小为 2.2 毫米,增加一个支承垫会因仰角波束宽度而改变对血管和囊肿的观察。对于在现代超声系统上使用支承垫的临床医生来说,这是一个值得注意的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信