Comparison of 3-D synthetic aperture phased-array ultrasound imaging and parallel beamforming

Rasmussen, Morten Fischer; Jensen, Jørgen Arendt

doi:10.1109/tuffc.2014.006345

Cited by 28 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, once such limitations are addressed, 3-D SA images can be reconstructed using 2-D probes. 53,54 Current commercial 3-D US scanners are optimized for acceptable imaging frame rates as opposed to depth and resolution, which are of higher interest in calibration with a stationary phantom. Barring these difficulties, 3-D probe calibration may be constructed from the combination of biplane calibrations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of line fiducial parameters and beamforming on ultrasound calibration

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Ultrasound (US)-guided interventions are often enhanced via integration with an augmented reality environment, a necessary component of which is US calibration. Calibration requires the segmentation of fiducials, i.e., a phantom, in US images. Fiducial localization error (FLE) can decrease US calibration accuracy, which fundamentally affects the total accuracy of the interventional guidance system. Here, we investigate the effects of US image reconstruction techniques as well as phantom material and geometry on US calibration. It was shown that the FLE was reduced by 29% with synthetic transmit aperture imaging compared with conventional B-mode imaging in a Z-bar calibration, resulting in a 10% reduction of calibration error. In addition, an evaluation of a variety of calibration phantoms with different geometrical and material properties was performed. The phantoms included braided wire, plastic straws, and polyvinyl alcohol cryogel tubes with different diameters. It was shown that these properties have a significant effect on calibration error, which is a variable based on US beamforming techniques. These results would have important implications for calibration procedures and their feasibility in the context of image-guided procedures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of line fiducial parameters and beamforming on ultrasound calibration

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this can be attributed to the wire being placed 1 mm further from the center of the array in the apodized measurement because of alignment imperfections. The signal-to-noise ratio (snr) in the beamformed image was calculated using the method presented in [45,Eq. (9)], yielding an snr of 46.9 dB.…”

Section: Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

3-D imaging using row–column-addressed arrays with integrated apodization— part ii: transducer fabrication and experimental results

Christiansen

Rasmussen

Bagge³

et al. 2015

IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelect., Freq. Contr.

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper demonstrates the fabrication, characterization, and experimental imaging results of a 62+62 element λ/2-pitch row-column-addressed capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducer (CMUT) array with integrated apodization. A new fabrication process was used to manufacture a 26.3 mm by 26.3 mm array using five lithography steps. The array includes an integrated apodization, presented in detail in Part I of this paper, which is designed to reduce the amplitude of the ghost echoes that are otherwise prominent for row-column-addressed arrays. Custom front-end electronics were produced with the capability of transmitting and receiving on all elements, and the option of disabling the integrated apodization. The center frequency and -6-dB fractional bandwidth of the array elements were 2.77 ± 0.26 MHz and 102 ± 10%, respectively. The surface transmit pressure at 2.5 MHz was 590 ± 73 kPa, and the sensitivity was 0.299 ± 0.090 V/Pa. The nearest neighbor crosstalk level was -23.9 ± 3.7 dB, while the transmit-to-receive-elements crosstalk level was -40.2 ± 3.5 dB. Imaging of a 0.3-mm-diameter steel wire using synthetic transmit focusing with 62 single-element emissions demonstrated axial and lateral FWHMs of 0.71 mm and 1.79 mm (f-number: 1.4), respectively, compared with simulated axial and lateral FWHMs of 0.69 mm and 1.76 mm. The dominant ghost echo was reduced by 15.8 dB in measurements using the integrated apodization compared with the disabled configuration. The effect was reproduced in simulations, showing a ghost echo reduction of 18.9 dB.

show abstract

“…2 (left), is chosen as the transmit aperture. 8 To get a wide receive aperture and thereby a narrow receive beam main-lobe, the cross array is also used in receive. The widest possible array, a cross array along the diagonals, is chosen as receive aperture.…”

Section: Measurement and Simulation Setupsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vivoreal-time volumetric synthetic aperture ultrasound imaging

Bouzari

Rasmussen

Brandt

et al. 2015

Medical Imaging 2015: Ultrasonic Imaging and Tomography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic aperture (SA) imaging can be used to achieve real-time volumetric ultrasound imaging using 2-D array transducers. The sensitivity of SA imaging is improved by maximizing the acoustic output, but one must consider the limitations of an ultrasound system, both technical and biological. This paper investigates the in vivo applicability and sensitivity of volumetric SA imaging. Utilizing the transmit events to generate a set of virtual point sources, a frame rate of 25 Hz for a 90• × 90• field-of-view was achieved. data were obtained using a 3.5 MHz 32×32 elements 2-D phased array transducer connected to the experimental scanner (SARUS). Proper scaling is applied to the excitation signal such that intensity levels are in compliance with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations for in vivo ultrasound imaging. The measured Mechanical Index and spatial-peaktemporal-average intensity for parallel beamforming (PB) are 0.83 and 377.5 mW/cm 2 , and for SA are 0.48 and 329.5 mW/cm 2 . A human kidney was volumetrically imaged with SA and PB techniques simultaneously. Two radiologists for evaluation of the volumetric SA were consulted by means of a questionnaire on the level of details perceivable in the beamformed images. The comparison was against PB based on the in vivo data. The feedback from the domain experts indicates that volumetric SA images internal body structures with a better contrast resolution compared to PB at all positions in the entire imaged volume. Furthermore, the autocovariance of a homogeneous area in the in vivo SA data, had 23.5% smaller width at the half of its maximum value compared to PB.

show abstract

Comparison of 3-D synthetic aperture phased-array ultrasound imaging and parallel beamforming

Cited by 28 publications

References 40 publications

Effects of line fiducial parameters and beamforming on ultrasound calibration

Effects of line fiducial parameters and beamforming on ultrasound calibration

3-D imaging using row–column-addressed arrays with integrated apodization— part ii: transducer fabrication and experimental results

In vivoreal-time volumetric synthetic aperture ultrasound imaging

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About