Microbubble ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) were recently approved by the Food and Drug administration for non-cardiac imaging. The physical principles of UCAs, methods of administration, dosage, adverse effects, and imaging techniques both current and future are described. UCAs consist of microbubbles in suspension which strongly interact with the ultrasound beam and are readily detectable by ultrasound imaging systems. They are confined to the blood pool when administered intravenously, unlike iodinated and gadolinium contrast agents. UCAs have a proven safety record based on over two decades of use, during which they have been used in echocardiography in the U.S. and for non-cardiac imaging in the rest of the world. Adverse effects are less common with UCAs than CT/MR contrast agents. Compared to CT and MR, contrast-enhanced ultrasound has the advantages of real-time imaging, portability, and reduced susceptibility to metal and motion artifact. UCAs are not nephrotoxic and can be used in renal failure. High acoustic amplitudes can cause microbubbles to fragment in a manner that can result in short-term increases in capillary permeability or capillary rupture. These bioeffects can be beneficial and have been used to enhance drug delivery under appropriate conditions. Imaging with a mechanical index of < 0.4 preserves the microbubbles and is not typically associated with substantial bioeffects. Molecularly targeted ultrasound contrast agents are created by conjugating the microbubble shell with a peptide, antibody, or other ligand designed to target an endothelial biomarker associated with tumor angiogenesis or inflammation. These microbubbles then accumulate in the microvasculature at target sites where they can be imaged. Ultrasound contrast agents are a valuable addition to the diagnostic imaging toolkit. They will facilitate cross-sectional abdominal imaging in situations where contrast-enhanced CT and MR are contraindicated or impractical.

Focused ultrasound with nanodroplets could facilitate localized drug delivery after vaporization with potentially improved in vivo stability, drug payload, and minimal interference outside of the focal zone compared with microbubbles. While the feasibility of blood-brain barrier (BBB) opening using nanodroplets has been previously reported, characterization of the associated delivery has not been achieved. It was hypothesized that the outcome of drug delivery was associated with the droplet's sensitivity to acoustic energy, and can be modulated with the boiling point of the liquid core. Therefore, in this study, octafluoropropane (OFP) and decafluorobutane (DFB) nanodroplets were used both in vitro for assessing their relative vaporization efficiency with high-speed microscopy, and in vivo for delivering molecules with a size relevant to proteins (40 kDa dextran) to the murine brain. It was found that at low pressures (300-450 kPa), OFP droplets vaporized into a greater number of microbubbles compared to DFB droplets at higher pressures (750-900 kPa) in the in vitro study. In the in vivo study, successful delivery was achieved with OFP droplets at 300 kPa and 450 kPa without evidence of cavitation damage using ¼ dosage, compared to DFB droplets at 900 kPa where histology indicated tissue damage due to inertial cavitation. In conclusion, the vaporization efficiency of nanodroplets positively impacted the amount of molecules delivered to the brain. The OFP droplets due to the higher vaporization efficiency served as better acoustic agents to deliver large molecules efficiently to the brain compared with the DFB droplets.

Bubbles are known to form in the body after scuba dives, even those done well within the decompression model limits. These can sometimes trigger decompression sickness and the dive protocols should therefore aim to limit bubble formation and growth from hyperbaric decompression. Understanding these processes physiologically has been a challenge for decades and there are a number of questions still unanswered. The physics and historical background of this field of study is presented and the latest studies and current developments reviewed. Heterogeneous nucleation is shown to remain the prime candidate for bubble formation in this context. The two main theories to account for micronuclei stability are then to consider hydrophobicity of surfaces or tissue elasticity, both of which could also explain some physiological observations. Finally the modeling relevance of the bubble formation process is discussed, together with that of bubble growth as well as multiple bubble behavior.