No abstract

Two-dimensional (2D) shear wave elastography presents 2D quantitative shear elasticity maps of tissue, which are clinically useful for both focal lesion detection and diffuse disease diagnosis. Realization of 2D shear wave elastography on conventional ultrasound scanners, however, is challenging due to the low tracking pulse-repetition-frequency (PRF) of these systems. While some clinical and research platforms support software beamforming and plane wave imaging with high PRF, the majority of current clinical ultrasound systems do not have the software beamforming capability, which presents a critical challenge for translating the 2D shear wave elastography technique from laboratory to clinical scanners. To address this challenge, this paper presents a Time Aligned Sequential Tracking (TAST) method for shear wave tracking on conventional ultrasound scanners. TAST takes advantage of the parallel beamforming capability of conventional systems and realizes high PRF shear wave tracking by sequentially firing tracking vectors and aligning shear wave data in the temporal direction. The Comb-push Ultrasound Shear Elastography (CUSE) technique was used to simultaneously produce multiple shear wave sources within the field-of-view (FOV) to enhance shear wave signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR) and facilitate robust reconstructions of 2D elasticity maps. TAST and CUSE were realized on a conventional ultrasound scanner (the General Electric LOGIQ E9). A phantom study showed that the shear wave speed measurements from the LOGIQ E9 were in good agreement to the values measured from other 2D shear wave imaging technologies. An inclusion phantom study showed that the LOGIQ E9 had comparable performance to the Aixplorer (Supersonic Imagine) in terms of bias and precision in measuring different sized inclusions. Finally, in vivo case analysis of a breast with a malignant mass, and a liver from a healthy subject demonstrated the feasibility of using the LOGIQ E9 for in vivo 2D shear wave elastography. These promising results indicate that the proposed technique can enable the implementation of 2D shear wave elastography on conventional ultrasound scanners and potentially facilitate wider clinical applications with shear wave elastography.

Using ultrasonic shear wave speed (SWS) estimates has become popular to noninvasively evaluate liver fibrosis, but significant inter-system variability in liver SWS measurements can preclude meaningful comparison of measurements performed with different systems. The RSNA Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance (QIBA) ultrasound SWS committee has been developing elastic and viscoelastic (VE) phantoms to evaluate system dependencies of SWS estimates. The objective of this study is to compare SWS measurements between commercially-available systems using phantoms that have viscoelastic properties similar to those observed in normal and fibrotic liver. CIRS, Inc. fabricated three phantoms using a proprietary oil-water emulsion infused in a Zerdine R hydrogel that were matched in viscoelastic behavior to healthy and fibrotic human liver data. Phantoms were measured at academic, clinical, government and vendor sites using different systems with curvilinear arrays at multiple focal depths (3.0, 4.5 & 7.0 cm). The results of this study show that current-generation ultrasound SWS measurement systems are able to differentiate viscoelastic materials that span healthy to fibrotic liver. The deepest focal depth (7.0 cm) yielded the greatest inter-system variability for each phantom (maximum of 17.7%) as evaluated by IQR. Inter-system variability was consistent across all 3 phantoms and was not a function of stiffness. Median SWS estimates for the greatest outlier system for each phantom/focal depth combination ranged from 12.7-17.6%. Future efforts will include performing more robust statistical analyses of these data, comparing these phantom data trends with viscoelastic digital phantom data, providing vendors with study site data to refine their systems to have more consistent measurements, and integrating these data into the QIBA ultrasound shear wave speed measurement profile.

Objectives To quantify the bias of shear wave speed (SWS) measurements between different commercial ultrasonic shear elasticity systems and a magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) system in elastic and viscoelastic phantoms. Methods Two elastic phantoms, representing healthy through fibrotic liver, were measured with 5 different ultrasound platforms, and 3 viscoelastic phantoms, representing healthy through fibrotic liver tissue, were measured with 12 different ultrasound platforms. Measurements were performed with different systems at different sites, at 3 focal depths, and with different appraisers. The SWS bias across the systems was quantified as a function of the system, site, focal depth, and appraiser. A single MRE research system was also used to characterize these phantoms using discrete frequencies from 60 to 500 Hz. Results The SWS from different systems had mean difference 95% confidence intervals of ±0.145 m/s (±9.6%) across both elastic phantoms and ± 0.340 m/s (±15.3%) across the viscoelastic phantoms. The focal depth and appraiser were less significant sources of SWS variability than the system and site. Magnetic resonance elastography best matched the ultrasonic SWS in the viscoelastic phantoms using a 140 Hz source but had a − 0.27 ± 0.027‐m/s (−12.2% ± 1.2%) bias when using the clinically implemented 60‐Hz vibration source. Conclusions Shear wave speed reconstruction across different manufacturer systems is more consistent in elastic than viscoelastic phantoms, with a mean difference bias of < ±10% in all cases. Magnetic resonance elastographic measurements in the elastic and viscoelastic phantoms best match the ultrasound systems with a 140‐Hz excitation but have a significant negative bias operating at 60 Hz. This study establishes a foundation for meaningful comparison of SWS measurements made with different platforms.

Objective. This article describes an American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine-sponsored intercomparison of the results of acoustic power measurements performed by several laboratories. Methods. Two primary calibration techniques, namely, planar scanning and radiation force balance, were used in the frequency range typical of that in which sonographic imaging devices operate. The same reference source, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (Gaithersburg, MD) standard ultrasonic power source, capable of producing acoustic fields in the frequency range from approximately 1 to 21 MHz, was circulated to 3 laboratories. Results. The results of the calibrations indicate that the overall uncertainty in acoustic power measurements depends on the target and the measurement method. In the case of radiation force balance measurements with an absorbing target, the largest discrepancy between the available National Institute of Standards and Technology-calibrated results and the reported data was 10.6% at approximately 2.5 MHz. At higher frequencies, beyond 10 MHz, the largest discrepancy reported with an absorbing target was 8.4%. For a reflecting target, the largest discrepancies were 16.2% at approximately 3.7 MHz and 15.4% at about 10 MHz. The largest discrepancy identified for the planar scanning technique below 10 MHz was 7.4% at 3.7 MHz. Conclusions. The results obtained suggest that an absorbing target may be preferable for acoustic power measurements with radiation force balance. In a group that consists of 2 research laboratories and 1 manufacturer, the power measurements agreed within 16%. Key words: planar scanning technique; radiation force balance; ultrasonic hydrophones; ultrasonic transducers.