Evaluations of UltraiQ software for objective ultrasound image quality assessment using images from a commercial scanner

Abstract

We evaluated a commercially available software package that uses B‐mode images to semi‐automatically measure quantitative metrics of ultrasound image quality, such as contrast response, depth of penetration (DOP), and spatial resolution (lateral, axial, and elevational). Since measurement of elevational resolution is not a part of the software package, we achieved it by acquiring phantom images with transducers tilted at 45 degrees relative to the phantom. Each measurement was assessed in terms of measurement stability, sensitivity, repeatability, and semi‐automated measurement success rate. All assessments were performed on a GE Logiq E9 ultrasound system with linear (9L or 11L), curved (C1‐5), and sector (S1‐5) transducers, using a CIRS model 040GSE phantom. In stability tests, the measurements of contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution remained within a ±10% variation threshold in 90%, 100%, and 69% of cases, respectively. In sensitivity tests, contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution measurements followed the expected behavior in 100%, 100%, and 72% of cases, respectively. In repeatability testing, intra‐ and inter‐individual coefficients of variations were equal to or less than 3.2%, 1.3%, and 4.4% for contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution (lateral and axial), respectively. The coefficients of variation corresponding to the elevational resolution test were all within 9.5%. Overall, in our assessment, the evaluated package performed well for objective and quantitative assessment of the above‐mentioned image qualities under well‐controlled acquisition conditions. We are finding it to be useful for various clinical ultrasound applications including performance comparison between scanners from different vendors.

Main Uncertainties in the RF Ultrasound Scanning Simulation of the Standard Ultrasound Phantoms

“…An experimental investigation of scanner’s resolution in three space directions for 3 MHz phased array transducers was presented in Long et al [ 51 ]. The individual measurements as a function of depth agree with expectation: elevational resolution is worst (minimum 2 mm) and varies the most versus depth, with a distinct hourglass profile; the axial resolution is best and remains roughly constant (around 1 mm) versus depth; the lateral resolution is between the other two and demonstrates modest changes versus depth.…”

Technical assessment of resolution of handheld ultrasound devices and clinical implications

“…For each device, six B-mode images of the phantom were taken using the abdominal preset and a curved array or a curved preset on a linear transducer (for the Butterfly device). This approach was reported to produce high inter- and intraoperator repeatability 16 . Full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the embedded pins was calculated automatically using the UltraiQ Desktop software.…”

Systematic optimization of ultrasound grayscale imaging presets and its application in abdominal scanning

“…Gray map function was plotted using a custom MATLAB program in order to identify a map function on system 1 which would be close to system 2. A CIRS Model 040GSE phantom (CIRS Inc., Norfolk, VA) was used to measure global contrast during the parameter changes with the gray‐scale targets (−9, −6, −3, +3, +6 dB) using the UltraiQ software (Cablon Medical B.V., Leusden, The Netherlands), 7 in order to confirm that preset changes were moving toward the right direction, that is, improving contrast as identified in step 1. If there is no reference system to try to move toward, radiologists and sonographers might need to be present or provide timely input, especially for subjective preferences such as tint map. Fine‐tuning basic parameters and more advanced parameters such as spatial compounding, speckle reduction, and noise reduction, using volunteers and/or good anthropomorphic phantoms if volunteer scanning is not feasible.…”