Jonas Jensen, J. B. Olesen, P. Hansen, M. Nielsen, J. Jensen
{"title":"不依赖角度的容积流量估计器的精度和误差来源","authors":"Jonas Jensen, J. B. Olesen, P. Hansen, M. Nielsen, J. Jensen","doi":"10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates sources of error for a vector velocity volume flow estimator. Quantification of the estimator's accuracy is performed theoretically and investigated in vivo. Womersley's model for pulsatile flow is used to simulate velocity profiles and calculate volume flow errors in cases of elliptical vessels and not placing the transducer at the vessel center. Simulations show, i.e., that volume flow is underestimated with 5 %, when the transducer is placed 15 % from the vessel center. Twenty patients with arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis are scanned in a clinical study. A BK Medical UltraView 800 ultrasound scanner with a 9 MHz linear array transducer is used to obtain Vector Flow Imaging sequences of a superficial part of the fistulas. Cross-sectional diameters of each fistula are measured on B-mode images by rotating the scan plane 90 degrees. The major axis of the fistulas was on average 8.6 % larger than the minor axis, so elliptic dimensions should be taken into account in volume flow estimation. The ultrasound beam was on average 1.5 ± 0.8 mm off-axis, corresponding to 28.5 ± 11.3 % of the major semi-axis of a fistula, and this could result in 15 % underestimated volume flow according to the simulation. Volume flow estimates were corrected for the beam being off-axis, but was not able to significantly decrease the error relative to measurements with the reference method.","PeriodicalId":153901,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Accuracy and sources of error for an angle independent volume flow estimator\",\"authors\":\"Jonas Jensen, J. B. Olesen, P. Hansen, M. Nielsen, J. Jensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0425\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper investigates sources of error for a vector velocity volume flow estimator. Quantification of the estimator's accuracy is performed theoretically and investigated in vivo. Womersley's model for pulsatile flow is used to simulate velocity profiles and calculate volume flow errors in cases of elliptical vessels and not placing the transducer at the vessel center. Simulations show, i.e., that volume flow is underestimated with 5 %, when the transducer is placed 15 % from the vessel center. Twenty patients with arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis are scanned in a clinical study. A BK Medical UltraView 800 ultrasound scanner with a 9 MHz linear array transducer is used to obtain Vector Flow Imaging sequences of a superficial part of the fistulas. Cross-sectional diameters of each fistula are measured on B-mode images by rotating the scan plane 90 degrees. The major axis of the fistulas was on average 8.6 % larger than the minor axis, so elliptic dimensions should be taken into account in volume flow estimation. The ultrasound beam was on average 1.5 ± 0.8 mm off-axis, corresponding to 28.5 ± 11.3 % of the major semi-axis of a fistula, and this could result in 15 % underestimated volume flow according to the simulation. Volume flow estimates were corrected for the beam being off-axis, but was not able to significantly decrease the error relative to measurements with the reference method.\",\"PeriodicalId\":153901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2014 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2014 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0425\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2014.0425","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
摘要
本文研究了矢量速度体积流量估计器的误差来源。定量估计器的精度进行了理论和体内研究。Womersley的脉动流模型用于模拟椭圆血管的速度分布,并计算在不将换能器放置在血管中心的情况下的体积流量误差。模拟表明,当换能器放置在距离容器中心15%的位置时,体积流量被低估了5%。本文对20例血液透析动静脉瘘患者进行了临床扫描。使用BK Medical UltraView 800超声扫描仪和9 MHz线性阵列换能器获得瘘表面部分的矢量流成像序列。通过将扫描平面旋转90度,在b模式图像上测量每个瘘管的横截面直径。瘘管的长轴比短轴平均大8.6%,因此在容积流量估计中应考虑椭圆尺寸。超声束平均离轴1.5±0.8 mm,相当于瘘管主半轴的28.5±11.3%,根据模拟,这可能导致15%的体积流量低估。对光束离轴的体积流量估计进行了修正,但与参考方法相比,不能显著降低误差。
Accuracy and sources of error for an angle independent volume flow estimator
This paper investigates sources of error for a vector velocity volume flow estimator. Quantification of the estimator's accuracy is performed theoretically and investigated in vivo. Womersley's model for pulsatile flow is used to simulate velocity profiles and calculate volume flow errors in cases of elliptical vessels and not placing the transducer at the vessel center. Simulations show, i.e., that volume flow is underestimated with 5 %, when the transducer is placed 15 % from the vessel center. Twenty patients with arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis are scanned in a clinical study. A BK Medical UltraView 800 ultrasound scanner with a 9 MHz linear array transducer is used to obtain Vector Flow Imaging sequences of a superficial part of the fistulas. Cross-sectional diameters of each fistula are measured on B-mode images by rotating the scan plane 90 degrees. The major axis of the fistulas was on average 8.6 % larger than the minor axis, so elliptic dimensions should be taken into account in volume flow estimation. The ultrasound beam was on average 1.5 ± 0.8 mm off-axis, corresponding to 28.5 ± 11.3 % of the major semi-axis of a fistula, and this could result in 15 % underestimated volume flow according to the simulation. Volume flow estimates were corrected for the beam being off-axis, but was not able to significantly decrease the error relative to measurements with the reference method.