The destructive growth and collapse of cavitation bubbles are used for therapeutic purposes in focused ultrasound procedures and can contribute to tissue damage in traumatic injuries. Histotripsy is a focused ultrasound procedure that relies on controlled cavitation to homogenize soft tissue. Experimental studies of histotripsy cavitation have shown that the extent of ablation in different tissues depends on tissue mechanical properties and waveform parameters. Variable tissue susceptibility to the large stresses, strains, and strain rates developed by cavitation bubbles has been suggested as a basis for localized liver tumor treatments that spare large vessels and bile ducts. However, field quantities developed within microns of cavitation bubbles are too localized and transient to measure in experiments. Previous numerical studies have attempted to circumvent this challenge but made limited use of realistic tissue property data. In this study, numerical simulations are used to calculate stress, strain, and strain rate fields produced by bubble oscillation under histotripsy forcing in a variety of tissues with literature-sourced viscoelastic and acoustic properties. Strain field calculations are then used to predict a theoretical damage radius using tissue ultimate strain data. Simulation results support the hypothesis that differential tissue
Experimental observations of the growth and collapse of acoustically and laser-nucleated single bubbles in water and agarose gels of varying stiffness are presented. The maximum radii of generated bubbles decreased as the stiffness of the media increased for both nucleation modalities, but the maximum radii of laser-nucleated bubbles decreased more rapidly than acoustically nucleated bubbles as the gel stiffness increased. For water and low stiffness gels, the collapse times were well predicted by a Rayleigh cavity, but bubbles collapsed faster than predicted in the higher stiffness gels. The growth and collapse phases occurred symmetrically (in time) about the maximum radius in water but not in gels, where the duration of the growth phase decreased more than the collapse phase as gel stiffness increased. Numerical simulations of the bubble dynamics in viscoelastic media showed varying degrees of success in accurately predicting the observations.
A variety of approaches have been used to model the dynamics of a single, isolated bubble nucleated by a microsecond length high–amplitude ultrasound pulse (e.g. a histotripsy pulse). Until recently, the lack of single–bubble experimental radius vs. time data for bubble dynamics under a well–characterized driving pressure has limited model validation efforts. This study uses radius vs. time measurements of single, spherical histotripsy–nucleated bubbles in water to quantitatively compare and validate a variety of bubble dynamics modeling approaches, including compressible and incompressible models as well as different thermal models. A strategy for inferring an analytic representation of histotripsy waveforms directly from experimental radius vs. time and cavitation threshold data is presented. We compare distributions of a calculated validation metric obtained for each model applied to 88 experimental data sets. There is minimal distinction (<1%) among the modeling approaches for compressibility and thermal effects considered in this study. These results suggest that our proposed strategy to infer the waveform, combined with simple models minimizing parametric uncertainty and computational resource demands accurately represent single–bubble dynamics in histotripsy, including at and near the maximum bubble radius. Remaining sources of parametric and model–based uncertainty are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.