Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities

Descripción del Articulo

The backscatter coefficient (BSC) describes the scattering properties of a medium and can be used to characterize tissue. To calculate the BSC a calibration spectrum is required, which can be acquired using either a reference phantom method (RPM) or the planar reflector method (PRM). Although ultras...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Coila, Andres, Oelze, Michael
Formato: artículo
Fecha de Publicación:2019
Institución:Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación
Repositorio:CONCYTEC-Institucional
Lenguaje:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.concytec.gob.pe:20.500.12390/2837
Enlace del recurso:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12390/2837
https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2019.8926055
Nivel de acceso:acceso abierto
Materia:ultrasonic transducers
biological tissues
biomedical transducers
biomedical ultrasonics
calibration
phantoms
ultrasonic propagation
ultrasonic scattering
https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.04.01
id CONC_9ccac05a8f1223f8f5c8372b49f743de
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.concytec.gob.pe:20.500.12390/2837
network_acronym_str CONC
network_name_str CONCYTEC-Institucional
repository_id_str 4689
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
title Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
spellingShingle Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
Coila, Andres
ultrasonic transducers
biological tissues
biomedical transducers
biomedical ultrasonics
calibration
phantoms
ultrasonic propagation
ultrasonic scattering
https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.04.01
title_short Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
title_full Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
title_fullStr Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
title_full_unstemmed Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
title_sort Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities
author Coila, Andres
author_facet Coila, Andres
Oelze, Michael
author_role author
author2 Oelze, Michael
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Coila, Andres
Oelze, Michael
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv ultrasonic transducers
topic ultrasonic transducers
biological tissues
biomedical transducers
biomedical ultrasonics
calibration
phantoms
ultrasonic propagation
ultrasonic scattering
https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.04.01
dc.subject.es_PE.fl_str_mv biological tissues
biomedical transducers
biomedical ultrasonics
calibration
phantoms
ultrasonic propagation
ultrasonic scattering
dc.subject.ocde.none.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.04.01
description The backscatter coefficient (BSC) describes the scattering properties of a medium and can be used to characterize tissue. To calculate the BSC a calibration spectrum is required, which can be acquired using either a reference phantom method (RPM) or the planar reflector method (PRM). Although ultrasonic propagation is quasilinear at low acoustic pressures, for high acoustic pressures, acoustic nonlinear distortion becomes prevalent. Because water is low loss, use of the PRM method may introduce significant nonlinearities to the BSC estimation. In this study, we assessed the effects of the acoustic nonlinearities on BSC estimation when using the RPM and the PRM. Phantoms were scanned by exciting a single-element focused transducer (f/2) using one excitation level from low-power (LP) equipment (5800 PR, Panametrics Olympus, USA) and six excitation levels (EL1 to EL6) from high-power (HP) equipment (RAM-5000, Ritec, USA). This resulted in scanning the phantoms with increasingly higher pressures, but still within FDA limits for diagnostic ultrasound. The two phantoms, labelled phantoms A and B, had glass beads with diameters in the range 75-90 and 9-43 μm, respectively. The BSCs estimated with the LP system were used as a baseline. The normalized root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was calculated from BSCs estimated using the HP system with respect to the baseline. The BSC was parameterized to estimate the effective scatterer diameters (ESD) for each phantom using Faran's scattering theory. The BSC estimates resulted in smaller variations versus excitation levels for the RPM compared to the PRM. In the PRM, the RMSE was 0.62 ± 0.42 and 0.98 ± 0.77 for phantoms A and B, respectively; whereas, in the RPM, the RMSE was 0.21 ± 0.06 and 0.25 ± 0.12 for phantoms A and B, respectively. The ESD for the phantom A using the PRM decreased from 75 μm for EL1 to 39 μm for EL6; and using the RPM the ESD was 74.7 ± 2.3 μm across all settings. The ESD for the phantom B using the PRM decreas...
publishDate 2019
dc.date.accessioned.none.fl_str_mv 2024-05-30T23:13:38Z
dc.date.available.none.fl_str_mv 2024-05-30T23:13:38Z
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2019
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.uri.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12390/2837
dc.identifier.doi.none.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2019.8926055
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12390/2837
https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2019.8926055
dc.language.iso.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.ispartof.none.fl_str_mv 2019 IEEE INTERNATIONAL ULTRASONICS SYMPOSIUM (IUS)
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv IEEE
publisher.none.fl_str_mv IEEE
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONCYTEC-Institucional
instname:Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación
instacron:CONCYTEC
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovación
instacron_str CONCYTEC
institution CONCYTEC
reponame_str CONCYTEC-Institucional
collection CONCYTEC-Institucional
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositorio Institucional CONCYTEC
repository.mail.fl_str_mv repositorio@concytec.gob.pe
_version_ 1839175406426521600
spelling Publicationrp07702600rp07703600Coila, AndresOelze, Michael2024-05-30T23:13:38Z2024-05-30T23:13:38Z2019https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12390/2837https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2019.8926055The backscatter coefficient (BSC) describes the scattering properties of a medium and can be used to characterize tissue. To calculate the BSC a calibration spectrum is required, which can be acquired using either a reference phantom method (RPM) or the planar reflector method (PRM). Although ultrasonic propagation is quasilinear at low acoustic pressures, for high acoustic pressures, acoustic nonlinear distortion becomes prevalent. Because water is low loss, use of the PRM method may introduce significant nonlinearities to the BSC estimation. In this study, we assessed the effects of the acoustic nonlinearities on BSC estimation when using the RPM and the PRM. Phantoms were scanned by exciting a single-element focused transducer (f/2) using one excitation level from low-power (LP) equipment (5800 PR, Panametrics Olympus, USA) and six excitation levels (EL1 to EL6) from high-power (HP) equipment (RAM-5000, Ritec, USA). This resulted in scanning the phantoms with increasingly higher pressures, but still within FDA limits for diagnostic ultrasound. The two phantoms, labelled phantoms A and B, had glass beads with diameters in the range 75-90 and 9-43 μm, respectively. The BSCs estimated with the LP system were used as a baseline. The normalized root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was calculated from BSCs estimated using the HP system with respect to the baseline. The BSC was parameterized to estimate the effective scatterer diameters (ESD) for each phantom using Faran's scattering theory. The BSC estimates resulted in smaller variations versus excitation levels for the RPM compared to the PRM. In the PRM, the RMSE was 0.62 ± 0.42 and 0.98 ± 0.77 for phantoms A and B, respectively; whereas, in the RPM, the RMSE was 0.21 ± 0.06 and 0.25 ± 0.12 for phantoms A and B, respectively. The ESD for the phantom A using the PRM decreased from 75 μm for EL1 to 39 μm for EL6; and using the RPM the ESD was 74.7 ± 2.3 μm across all settings. The ESD for the phantom B using the PRM decreas...Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico - FondecytengIEEE2019 IEEE INTERNATIONAL ULTRASONICS SYMPOSIUM (IUS)info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessultrasonic transducersbiological tissues-1biomedical transducers-1biomedical ultrasonics-1calibration-1phantoms-1ultrasonic propagation-1ultrasonic scattering-1https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#3.04.01-1Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearitiesinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlereponame:CONCYTEC-Institucionalinstname:Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Tecnología e Innovacióninstacron:CONCYTEC#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE##PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#20.500.12390/2837oai:repositorio.concytec.gob.pe:20.500.12390/28372024-05-30 15:25:43.078http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_14cbinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessmetadata only accesshttps://repositorio.concytec.gob.peRepositorio Institucional CONCYTECrepositorio@concytec.gob.pe#PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE##PLACEHOLDER_PARENT_METADATA_VALUE#<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="0aae1057-ec28-4c85-b878-69eeefcffc1f"> <Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type> <Language>eng</Language> <Title>Backscatter Coefficient Estimation Bias under Acoustic Nonlinearities</Title> <PublishedIn> <Publication> <Title>2019 IEEE INTERNATIONAL ULTRASONICS SYMPOSIUM (IUS)</Title> </Publication> </PublishedIn> <PublicationDate>2019</PublicationDate> <DOI>https://doi.org/10.1109/ULTSYM.2019.8926055</DOI> <Authors> <Author> <DisplayName>Coila, Andres</DisplayName> <Person id="rp07702" /> <Affiliation> <OrgUnit> </OrgUnit> </Affiliation> </Author> <Author> <DisplayName>Oelze, Michael</DisplayName> <Person id="rp07703" /> <Affiliation> <OrgUnit> </OrgUnit> </Affiliation> </Author> </Authors> <Editors> </Editors> <Publishers> <Publisher> <DisplayName>IEEE</DisplayName> <OrgUnit /> </Publisher> </Publishers> <Keyword>ultrasonic transducers</Keyword> <Keyword>biological tissues</Keyword> <Keyword>biomedical transducers</Keyword> <Keyword>biomedical ultrasonics</Keyword> <Keyword>calibration</Keyword> <Keyword>phantoms</Keyword> <Keyword>ultrasonic propagation</Keyword> <Keyword>ultrasonic scattering</Keyword> <Abstract>The backscatter coefficient (BSC) describes the scattering properties of a medium and can be used to characterize tissue. To calculate the BSC a calibration spectrum is required, which can be acquired using either a reference phantom method (RPM) or the planar reflector method (PRM). Although ultrasonic propagation is quasilinear at low acoustic pressures, for high acoustic pressures, acoustic nonlinear distortion becomes prevalent. Because water is low loss, use of the PRM method may introduce significant nonlinearities to the BSC estimation. In this study, we assessed the effects of the acoustic nonlinearities on BSC estimation when using the RPM and the PRM. Phantoms were scanned by exciting a single-element focused transducer (f/2) using one excitation level from low-power (LP) equipment (5800 PR, Panametrics Olympus, USA) and six excitation levels (EL1 to EL6) from high-power (HP) equipment (RAM-5000, Ritec, USA). This resulted in scanning the phantoms with increasingly higher pressures, but still within FDA limits for diagnostic ultrasound. The two phantoms, labelled phantoms A and B, had glass beads with diameters in the range 75-90 and 9-43 μm, respectively. The BSCs estimated with the LP system were used as a baseline. The normalized root-mean-squared error (RMSE) was calculated from BSCs estimated using the HP system with respect to the baseline. The BSC was parameterized to estimate the effective scatterer diameters (ESD) for each phantom using Faran&apos;s scattering theory. The BSC estimates resulted in smaller variations versus excitation levels for the RPM compared to the PRM. In the PRM, the RMSE was 0.62 ± 0.42 and 0.98 ± 0.77 for phantoms A and B, respectively; whereas, in the RPM, the RMSE was 0.21 ± 0.06 and 0.25 ± 0.12 for phantoms A and B, respectively. The ESD for the phantom A using the PRM decreased from 75 μm for EL1 to 39 μm for EL6; and using the RPM the ESD was 74.7 ± 2.3 μm across all settings. The ESD for the phantom B using the PRM decreas...</Abstract> <Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" > </Access> </Publication> -1
score 13.243791
Nota importante:
La información contenida en este registro es de entera responsabilidad de la institución que gestiona el repositorio institucional donde esta contenido este documento o set de datos. El CONCYTEC no se hace responsable por los contenidos (publicaciones y/o datos) accesibles a través del Repositorio Nacional Digital de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Acceso Abierto (ALICIA).