A narrow-band ultrasonic shear-wave imaging technique for estimating phase speed was applied to fresh and thermally damaged porcine liver in vitro. Two constitutive models were applied to the measurements to represent rheological behavior of the tissue and estimate the complex shear modulus at frequencies between 50 and 300 Hz. Our results were compared to similar values from the literature to assess how well models represent liver measurements over a range of shear-wave frequencies, experimental conditions and mammalian species. We found remarkable consistency in some parameters but not in others, suggesting that the Kelvin-Voigt model commonly applied in elasticity-imaging situations is representative of tissue dispersion but the description it offers is incomplete. Data are consistent with the theory that viscoelastic contrast is more likely due to changes in protein and other biomolecular-scale structures than from tissue anatomy larger than a cell. Dispersion measurements at frequencies between 0.5–1000 kHz are needed to more completely evaluate models for the viscoelastic behavior liver.
ItohAUenoETohnoE, Breast disease: Clinical application of US elastography for diagnosisRadiology239, 341–350 (2006).
2.
QiuYSridharMTsouJK, Ultrasonic viscoelasticity imaging of nonpalpable breast tumors: preliminary resultsAcad Radiol15, 1526–1533 (2008).
3.
CasteraLVergniolJFoucherJ, Prospective comparison of transient elastography, fibrotest, APRI, and liver biopsy for the assessment of fibrosis in chronic hepatitis CGastroenterology128, 343–350 (2005).
4.
HuwartLSempouxCSalamehN, Liver fibrosis: Noninvasive assessment with MR elastography versus aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio indexRadiology245, 458–466 (2007).
5.
FaheyBJNelsonRCHsuSJ, In vivo guidance and assessment of liver radio-frequency ablation with acoustic radiation force elastographyUltrasound Med Biol34, 1590–1603 (2008).
6.
KanaiH. Propagation of spontaneously actuated pulsive vibration in human heart wall and in vivo viscoelasticity estimationIEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control52, 1931–1942 (2005).
7.
SackIRumpJElgetiT, MR elastography of the human heart: noninvasive assessment of myocardial elasticity changes by shear wave amplitude variations. Mag Reson Med61, 668–677 (2009).
8.
WeissREgorovVAyrapetyanS, Prostate mechanical imaging: A new method for prostate assessment. Urology71, 425–429 (2008).
9.
SackIBeierbachBWuerfelJ, The impact of aging and gender on brain viscoelasticity. Neuroimage46, 652–657 (2009).
10.
DischerDEJanmeyPWangYL, Tissue cells feel and respond to the stiffness of their substrate. Science310, 1139–1143 (2005).
TschoeglNW, The Phenomenological Theory of Linear Viscoelastic Behavior: An Introduction, (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg1989).
13.
OrescaninMInsanaMF, Shear modulus estimation with vibrating needle stimulationIEEE Trans Ultrason Ferro Freq Control57, 1358–1367 (2010).
14.
MadsenELSathoffHJZagzebskiJA, Ultrasonic shear wave properties of soft tissues and tissuelike materialsJ Acoust Soc Am74, 1346–1355 (1983).
15.
StylianopoulosTAksanABarocaszVH, A structural, kinetic model of soft tissue thermomechanicsBiophys J94, 717–725 (2008).
16.
KasaiCNamekawaKKoyanoA, Real-time two-dimensional blood flow imaging using an autocorrelation techniqueIEEE Trans Sonics Ultrason SU-32, 458–463 (1985).
17.
HoytKParkerKJRubensDJ, Real-time shear velocity imaging using sonoelastographic techniquesUltrasound Med Biol33, 1086–1097 (2007).
18.
KerdokAEOttensmeyerMPHoweRD, Effects of perfusion on the viscoelastic characteristics of liverJ Biomech39, 2221–2231 (2006).
19.
CarcioneJM, Wave Fields in Real Media: Wave Propagation in Anisotropic, Anelastic and Porous Media, (Elsevier Science Ltd., Oxford2001).
20.
AsbachPKlattDHamhaberU, Assessment of liver viscoelasticity using multifrequency MR elastographyMag Res Med60, 373–379 (2008).
21.
OrescaninMTooheyKInsanaMF, Material properties from acoustic radiation force step responseJ Acoust Soc Am, 125, 2928–2936 (2009).
22.
LiuZBilstonLE, Large deformation shear properties of liver tissueBiorheology39, 735–742 (2002).
23.
LudwigGD, The velocity of sound through tissues and the acoustic impedance of tissuesJ Acoust Soc Am22, 862–866 (1950).
24.
KallelFStaffordRJPriceRE, The feasibility of elastographic visualization of HIFU-induced thermal lesions in soft tissuesUltrasound Med Biol25, 641–647 (1999).
25.
LizziFLMuratoreRDengCX, Radiation-force technique to monitor lesions during ultrasonic therapyUltrasound Med Biol29, 1593–1605 (2003).
26.
MalekeCKonofagouEE, Harmonic motion imaging for focused ultrasound (HMIFU): a fully integrated technique for sonication and monitoring of thermal ablation in tissuesPhys Med Biol53, 1773–1793 (2008).
27.
KissMZDanielsMJVargheseT. Investigation of temperature-dependent viscoelastic properties of thermal lesions in ex-vivo animal liver tissueJ Biomech42, 959–966 (2009).
28.
ChenSUrbanMWPislaruC, Shearwave dispersion ultrasound vibrometry (SDUV) for measuring tissue elasticity and viscosityIEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control56, 55–62 (2009).
BarannikEAGimykATovstiakV, Doppler ultrasound detection of shear waves remotely induced in tissue phantoms and tissue in vitroUltrasonics40, 849–852 (2002).
31.
KonofagouEEHynynenK. Localized harmonic motion imaging: theory, simulations and experiments. Ultrasound Med Biol29, 1405–1413 (2003).
32.
NightingaleKSooMSNightingaleR, Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging: In vivo demonstration of clinical feasibilityUltrasound Med Biol28, 625–634 (2001).
33.
SinkusRSiegmannKXydeasT, MR elastography of breast lesions: understanding the solid/liquid duality can improve the specificity of contrast-enhanced MR mammographyMagn Reson Med58, 1135–1144 (2007).
34.
DeffieuxTMontaldoGTanterM, Shear wave spectroscopy for in vivo quantification of human soft tissues visco-elasticityIEEE Trans Med Imaging28, 313–322 (2009).
35.
CurleySAIzzoF. Radiofrequency ablation of primary and metastatic hepatic malignancies. Int J Clin Oncol7, 72–81 (2002).
36.
FrizzellLACarstensenEL, Shear properties of mammalian tissues at low megahertz frequenciesJ Acoust Soc Am60, 1409–1411 (1976).
37.
SinkusRSiegmannKXydeasT, MR elastography of breast lesions: understanding the solid/liquid duality can improve the specificity of contrast-enhanced MR mammographyMagnetic Resonance Med58, 1135–1144 (2007).
38.
SzaboTLWuJ. A model for longitudinal and shear wave propagation in viscoelastic mediaJ Acoust Soc Am107, 2437–2446 (2000).
39.
GossSAFrizzellLADunnF, Dependence of the ultrasonic properties of biological tissue on constituent proteinsJ Acoust Soc Am67, 1041–1044 (1980).
40.
ParkerKJ, Ultrasonic attenuation and absorption in liver tissue. Ultrasound Med Biol9, 363–369 (1983).
41.
AkashiNKushibikiJChubachiN, Acoustic properties of selected bovine tissues in the frequency range 20–200 MHzJ Acoust Soc Am98, 3035–3039 (1995).
