Abstract--The ultrasonic absorption was determined, by the transient thermoelectric method, for brain, heart, kidney, liver, tendon, and testis from cat, mouse, pig and beef. Comparison of these absorption {a) values with published values of attenuation (A) shows: (1) that the a and A coefficients have nearly the same frequency dependencies in the range 0.5-7 MHz, (2) that the magnitudes of a and A differ appreciably and that difference depends upon the method of measurement and tissue type, and (3) that there appears to be little species difference, at least as revealed by measurement of liver and tendon.

Threshold estimates and superthreshold behaviors for ultrasound-induced lung hemorrhage were investigated as a function of species (adult mice and rats) and ultrasound frequency (2.8 and 5.6 MHz). A total of 151 6-to-7-week-old female ICR mice and 160 10-to-11-week-old female Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly divided into two ultrasonic frequency groups, and further randomly divided into seven or eight ultrasonic peak rarefactional pressure groups. Each group consisted of about 10 animals. Animals were exposed to pulsed ultrasound at either 2.8-MHz center frequency (1-kHz PRF, 1.42-s pulse duration) or 5.6-MHz center frequency (1-kHz PRF, 1.17-s pulse duration) for a duration of 10 seconds. The in situ (at the pleural surface) peak rarefactional pressure levels ranged between 2.5 and 10.5 MPa for mice and between 2.3 and 11.3 MPa for rats. The mechanical index (MI) ranged between 1.4 and 6.3 at 2.8 MHz for mice and between 1.1 and 3.1 at 5.6 MHz for rats. The lesion surface area and depth were measured for each animal as well as the percentage of animals with lesions per group. The characteristics of the lesions produced in mice and rats were similar to those described in previous studies by our research group and others, suggesting a common pathogenesis in the initiation and propagation of the lesions at the gross and microscopic levels. The percentage of animals with lesions showed no statistical differences between species or between ultrasound frequencies. These findings suggest that mice and rats are similar in sensitivity to ultrasound-induced lung damage and that the occurrence of lung damage is independent of frequency. Lesion depth and surface area also showed no statistically significant differences between ultrasound frequencies for mice and rats. However, there was a significant difference between species for lesion area and a suggestive difference between species for lesion depth. The superthreshold behavior of lesion area and depth showed that rat lung had more damage than mouse lung, and the threshold estimates showed a weak, or lack of, frequency dependency, suggesting that the MI is not consistent with the observed findings.

No abstract

This review examines the nonthermal physical mechanisms by which ultrasound can harm tissue in postnatal patients. First the physical nature of the more significant interactions between ultrasound and tissue is described, followed by an examination of the existing literature with particular emphasis on the pressure thresholds for potential adverse effects. The interaction of ultrasonic fields with tissue depends in a fundamental way on whether the tissue naturally contains undissolved gas under normal physiologic conditions. Examples of gas-containing tissues are lung and intestine. Considerable effort has been devoted to investigating the acoustic parameters relevant to the threshold and extent of lung hemorrhage. Thresholds as low as 0.4 MPa at 1 MHz have been reported. The situation for intestinal damage is similar, although the threshold appears to be somewhat higher. For other tissues, auditory stimulation or tactile perception may occur, if rarely, during exposure to diagnostic ultrasound; ultrasound at similar or lower intensities is used therapeutically to accelerate the healing of bone fractures. At the exposure levels used in diagnostic ultrasound, there is no consistent evidence for adverse effects in tissues that are not known to contain stabilized gas bodies. Although modest tissue damage may occur in certain identifiable applications, the risk for induction of an adverse biological effect by a nonthermal mechanism due to exposure to diagnostic ultrasound is extremely small.

No abstract