Many studies have shown that atherosclerosis changes the ultrasonic attenuation properties of the vessel wall and plaque. Accurate estimation of the attenuation coefficient slope could therefore provide an early indication of atherosclerosis and the differentiation between low, mild and highly-attenuating plaque within the vessel. However, the traditional reference phantom method that fits the power spectrum in a region of interest fails to accurately estimate the attenuation coefficient for small irregular shaped ex-vivo plaque specimens. This discrepancy was primarily due to partial volume effects and the unknown backscatter coefficient of the plaque sample. We have developed a method based on the reference-phantom method that utilizes the difference in the acoustic power above and below the sample to accurately compute values of the attenuation coefficient ex vivo. Our results demonstrate that this approach overcomes the two drawbacks mentioned earlier and provides accurate estimates of the attenuation coefficient slope for small excised tissue samples.
KofoedSCGronholdtMLWilhjelmJEBismuthJSillesenH. Real-time spatial compound imaging improves reproducibility in the evaluation of atherosclerotic carotid plaques, Ultrasound Med Biol27, 1311–1317 (2001).
2.
ECST., Randomized trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST), Lancet351, 1379–1387 (1998).
3.
BarnettHJTaylorDWEliasziwM, Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators, N Engl J Med339, 1415–1425 (1998).
4.
FayadZAFusterV. Clinical imaging of the high-risk or vulnerable atherosclerotic plaque, Circ Res89, 305–316 (2001).
5.
RakebrandtFCrawfordDCHavardDColemanDWoodcockJP. Relationship between ultrasound texture classification images and histology of atherosclerotic plaque, Ultrasound Med Biol26, 1393–1402 (2000).
6.
O'DonnellMMillerJG, Quantitative broadband ultrasonic backscatter—An approach to non-destructive evaluation in acoustically inhomogeneous materials, J Appl Phys52, 1056–1065 (1981).
7.
LizziFLKingDLRorkeMC, Comparison of theoretical scattering results and ultrasonic data from clinical liver examinations, Ultrasound Med Biol14, 377–385 (1988).
8.
NassiriDKHillCR. The differential and total bulk acoustic scattering cross sections of some human and animal tissues, J Acoust Soc Am79, 2034–2047 (1986).
9.
InsanaMFHallTJFishbackJL. Identifying acoustic scattering sources in normal renal parenchyma from the anisotropy in acoustic properties, Ultrasound Med Biol17, 613–626 (1991).
10.
GarraBSInsanaMFSesterhennIA, Quantitative ultrasonic detection of parenchymal structural change in diffuse renal disease, Invest Radiol29, 134–140 (1994).
11.
NassiriDKHillCR. The use of angular acoustic scattering measurements to estimate structural parameters of human and animal tissues, J Acoust Soc Am79, 2048–2054 (1986).
12.
LizziFLGreenebaumMFeleppaEJElbaumMColemanDJ. Theoretical framework for spectrum analysis in ultrasonic tissue characterization, J Acoust Soc Am73, 1366–1373 (1983).
13.
LizziFLOstromogilskyMFeleppaEJRorkeMCYaremkoMM. Relationship of Ultrasonic Spectral Parameters to Features of Tissue Microstructure, IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelec Freq Contr34, 319–329 (1987).
14.
LizziFLAstorMFeleppaEJShaoMKaliszA. Statistical framework for ultrasonic spectral parameter imaging, Ultrasound Med Biol23, 1371–1382 (1997).
15.
LizziFLAlamSKMikaelianSLeePFeleppaEJ. On the statistics of ultrasonic spectral parameters, Ultrasound Med Biol32, 1671–1685 (2006).
16.
WatersKRBridalSLCohen-BacrieC, Parametric analysis of carotid plaque using a clinical ultrasound imaging system, Ultrasound Med Biol29, 1521–1530 (2003).
17.
NoritomiTSigelBSwamiV, Carotid plaque typing by multiple-parameter ultrasonic tissue characterization., Ultrasound Med Biol.23, 643–650. (1997).
18.
FinkMHottierFCardosoJF. Ultrasonic signal processing for in vivo attenuation measurement: short time Fourier analysis, Ultrasonic Imaging5, 117–135 (1983).
19.
KucRSchwartzM. Estimating the acoustic attenuation coefficient slope for liver from reflected ultrasound signals, IEEE Trans Son Ultrason26, 353–361 (1979).
20.
CloostermansMJThijssenJM. A beam corrected estimation of the frequency dependent attenuation of biological tissues from backscattered ultrasound, Ultrasonic Imaging5, 136–147 (1983).
21.
HePGreenleafJF. Application of stochastic analysis to ultrasonic echoes-estimation of attenuation and tissue heterogeneity from peaks of echo envelope, J Acoust Soc Am79, 526–534 (1986).
22.
YaoLXZagzebskiJAMadsenEL. Backscatter coefficient measurements using a reference phantom to extract depth-dependent instrumentation factors, Ultrasonic Imaging12, 58–70 (1990).
23.
TuHVargheseTMadsenELChenQZagzebskiJA. Ultrasound attenuation imaging using compound acquisition and processing, Ultrasonic Imaging25, 245–261 (2003).
24.
TuHZagzebskiJAGerigALChenQMadsenELHallTJ. Optimization of angular and frequency compounding in ultrasonic attenuation estimations, J Acoust Soc Am117, 3307–3318 (2005).
25.
BridalSLFornesPBrunevalPBergerG. Parametric (integrated backscatter and attenuation) images constructed using backscattered radio frequency signals (25–56 MHz) from human aortae in vitro, Ultrasound Med Biol23, 215–229 (1997).
26.
BridalSLFornesPBrunevalPBergerG. Correlation of ultrasonic attenuation (30 to 50 MHz and constituents of atherosclerotic plaque, Ultrasound Med Biol23, 691–703 (1997).
27.
BridalSLBeyssenBFornesPJuliaPBergerG. Multiparametric attenuation and backscatter images for characterization of carotid plaque, Ultrasonic Imaging22, 20–34 (2000).
28.
InsanaMFHallTJCookLT. Backscatter coefficient estimation using array transducers, IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelec Freq Cont41, 714–723 (1994).
29.
GerigAZagzebskiJVargheseT. Statistics of ultrasonic scatterer size estimation with a reference phantom, J Acoust Soc Am113, 3430–3437 (2003).
30.
GreenleafJFDuckFASamayoaWFJohnsonSA. Ultrasonic data acquisition and processing system for atherosclerotic tissue characterization, in Proc IEEE Ultrason Symp, pp. 738–743 (1974).
31.
PicanoELandiniLDistanteA, Different degrees of atherosclerosis detected by backscattered ultrasound: an in vitro study on fixed human aortic walls, J Clin Ultrasound11, 375–379 (1983).
32.
PicanoELandiniLDistanteA, Fibrosis, lipids, and calcium in human atherosclerotic plaque. In vitro differentiation from normal aortic walls by ultrasonic attenuation, Circ Res56, 556–562 (1985).
33.
RajuBISrinivasanMA. High-frequency ultrasonic attenuation and backscatter coefficients of in vivo normal human dermis and subcutaneous fat, Ultrasound Med Biol27, 1543–1556 (2001).
34.
WilsonTZagzebskiJLiY. A test phantom for estimating changes in the effective frequency of an ultrasonic scanner, J Ultrasound Med21, 937–945 (2002).
35.
GussenhovenEJEssedCELancee, Arterial wall characteristics determined by intravascular ultrasound imaging: an in vitro study, J Am Coll Cardiol14, 947–952 (1989).
36.
LockwoodGRRyanLKHuntJWFosterFS. Measurement of the ultrasonic properties of vascular tissues and blood from 35–65 MHz, Ultrasound Med Biol17, 653–666 (1991).
37.
TuH. Ultrasonic Attenuation Imaging and Analysis, Ph.D Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, (2005).
