Conventional two-dimensional (2D) ultrasound imaging is a powerful diagnostic tool in the hands of an experienced user, yet 2D ultrasound remains clinically underutilized and inherently incomplete, with output being very operator dependent. Volumetric ultrasound systems can more fully capture a three-dimensional (3D) region of interest, but current 3D systems require specialized transducers, are prohibitively expensive for many clinical departments, and do not register image orientation with respect to the patient; these systems are designed to provide improved workflow rather than operator independence. This work investigates whether it is possible to add volumetric 3D imaging capability to existing 2D ultrasound systems at minimal cost, providing a practical means of reducing operator dependence in ultrasound. In this paper, we present a low-cost method to make 2D ultrasound systems capable of quality volumetric image acquisition: we present the general system design and image acquisition method, including the use of a probe-mounted orientation sensor, a simple probe fixture prototype, and an offline volume reconstruction technique. We demonstrate initial results of the method, implemented using a Verasonics Vantage research scanner.
De WildeJRiversAPriceD. A review of the current use of magnetic resonance imaging in pregnancy and safety implications for the fetus. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2005;87(2):335-53.
6.
TolsgaardMGRingstedCDreislerENørgaardLNPetersenJHMadsenMEet al. Sustained effect of simulation-based ultrasound training on clinical performance: a randomized trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;46(3):312-8.
7.
AhmadRAlhashmiGAjlanAEldeekB.Impact of high-fidelity transvaginal ultrasound simulation for radiology on residents’ performance and satisfaction. Acad Radiol. 2015;22(2):234-39.
8.
BergWABlumeJDCormackJBMendelsonEB.Operator dependence of physician-performed whole-breast US: lesion detection and characterization. Radiology. 2006;241(2):355-65.
9.
GlorFPAriffBHughesADVerdonckPRThomSMGBarrattDCet al. Operator dependence of 3-D ultrasound-based computational fluid dynamics for the carotid bifurcation. IEEE T Med Imaging. 2005;24(4):451-56.
10.
HossackJAGallinatDJPetersenTEMolinariJJLittleSC. Medical diagnostic ultrasonic transducer probe and imaging system for use with a position and orientation sensor. US Patent 6,338,716, 2002.
11.
EmmeneggerNEngferO.3-D ultrasound recording device. Google Patents; 2003. US Patent 6,605,041.
12.
PragerRWIjazUZGeeATreeceGM.Three-dimensional ultrasound imaging. Proc IMechE, Part H: J Engineering in Medicine. 2010;224(2):193-223.
13.
SolbergOVLindsethFTorpHBlakeREHernesTAN. Freehand 3D ultrasound reconstruction algorithms: a review. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007;33(7):991-1009.
14.
LassoAHeffterTRankinAPinterCUngiTFichtingerG.PLUS: open-source toolkit for ultrasound-guided intervention systems. IEEE T Biomed Eng. 2014;61(10):2527-37.
15.
GeeAPragerRTreeceGBermanL.Engineering a freehand 3D ultrasound system. Pattern Recogn Lett. 2003;24(4):757-77.
16.
BoisvertJGobbiDVikalSRohlingRFichtingerGAbolmaesumiP.An open-source solution for interactive acquisition, processing and transfer of interventional ultrasound images. In: Proceedings MICCAI2008, pp. 1-8. [Online]. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10380/1459
17.
ChengPZhangHKimHSGaryKBlakeMBGobbiDet al. IGSTK: Framework and example application using an open source toolkit for image-guided surgery applications. In: Medical Imaging 2006: Visualization, Image-Guided Procedures, and Display, San Diego, CA, 12-14 February 2006, vol. 6141. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
18.
TreeceGMGeeAHPragerRWCashCJBermanLH.High-definition freehand 3-D ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29(4):529-46.
19.
StolkaPJKangHBoctorE.The MUSiiC toolkit: modular real-time toolkit for advanced ultrasound research. In: Proceedings MICCAI2010, pp. 1-11. [Online]. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10380/3172
20.
MarzKFranzAMSeitelAWintersteinABendlRZelzerSet al. MITK-US: real-time ultrasound support within MITK. Int J Comput Ass Rad. 2014;9(3):411-20.
21.
KapoorADeguetAKazanzidesP. Software components and frameworks for medical robot control. In: Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2006), Orlando, FL, 15-19 May 2006, pp. 3813-8. New York: IEEE.
22.
Von SpiczakJSamsetEDiMaioSReitmayrGSchmalstiegDBurghartCet al. Multimodal event streams for virtual reality. In: Electronic Imaging 2007, San Jose, CA, 28 January 2007, p. 65040M. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
23.
TaylorRMIIHudsonTCSeegerAWeberHJulianoJHelserAT. VRPN: a device-independent, network-transparent VR peripheral system. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Banff, AL, Canada, 15-17 November 2001, pp. 55-61. New York: ACM.
24.
ChouJC.Quaternion kinematic and dynamic differential equations. IEEE T Robotic Autom. 1992;8(1):53-64.
25.
BirkfellnerWHummelJWilsonEClearyK.Tracking devices. In: Peters T, Cleary K, eds. Image-Guided Interventions. New York: Springer; 2008. pp. 23-44.
26.
HastenteufelMVetterMMeinzerHPWolfI.Effect of 3D ultrasound probes on the accuracy of electromagnetic tracking systems. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2006;32(9):1359-68.
27.
TreeceGMPragerRWGeeAHBermanL.Correction of probe pressure artifacts in freehand 3D ultrasound. Med Image Anal. 2002;6(3):199-214.
28.
PragerRWRohlingRNGeeAHBermanL.Automatic calibration for 3-D free-hand ultrasound. Cambridge (UK): University of Cambridge, Department of Engineering; 1997. 27p.
29.
PragerRWGeeAHTreeceGMCashCJBermanLH.Sensorless freehand 3-D ultrasound using regression of the echo intensity. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29(3):437-46.
30.
BirkfellnerWWatzingerFWanschitzFEnislidisGKollmannCRafoltDet al. Systematic distortions in magnetic position digitizers. Med Phys. 1998;25(11):2242-8.
31.
HummelJFiglMKollmannCBergmannHBirkfellnerW.Evaluation of a miniature electromagnetic position tracker. Med Phys. 2002;29(10):2205-12.
32.
SchichoKFiglMDonatMBirkfellnerWSeemannRWagnerAet al. Stability of miniature electromagnetic tracking systems. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50(9):2089-98.
33.
HummelJBBaxMRFiglMLKangYMaurerCBirkfellnerWWet al. Design and application of an assessment protocol for electromagnetic tracking systems. Med Phys. 2005;32(7):2371-9.
34.
JaberzadehSScutterSZoghiM.Accuracy of an electromagnetic tracking device for measuring hip joint kinematics during gait: effects of metallic total hip replacement prosthesis, source-sensor distance and sensor orientation. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2005;28(3):184-9.
35.
GoldsmithAPedersenPSzaboT. An inertial-optical tracking system for portable, quantitative, 3D ultrasound. In: Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS 2008), Beijing, China, 2-5 November 2008, pp. 45-9. New York: IEEE.
36.
StolkaPJChoiJWangJChotiMBoctorEM. 5-DoF trajectory reconstruction for handheld ultrasound with local sensors. In: Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS 2009), Rome, Italy, 20-23 September 2009, pp. 1864-7. New York: IEEE.
37.
StolkaPJWangXLHagerGDBoctorEM.Navigation with local sensors in handheld 3D ultrasound: initial in-vivo experience. In: SPIE Medical Imaging, Lake Buena Vista, FL, 12 February 2011, p. 79681J. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
38.
OwenKMauldinFWHossackJA. Transducer motion estimation using combined ultrasound signal decorrelation and optical sensor data for low-cost ultrasound systems with increased field of view. In: Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS 2011), Orlando, FL, 18-21 October 2011, pp. 1431-4. New York: IEEE.
39.
HousdenRJTreeceGMGeeAHPragerRWStreetT.Hybrid systems for reconstruction of freehand 3D ultrasound data. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge, Department of Engineering; 2007. 20 p.
40.
LammelG. The future of MEMS sensors in our connected world. In: 2015 28th IEEE International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS), Estoril, Portugal, 18-22 January 2015, pp. 61-4. New York: IEEE.
41.
ChanKYRajakarunaNRathnayakeCMurrayI.Image deblurring using a hybrid optimization algorithm. In: 2014 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), Beijing, China, 6-11 July 22014, pp. 1243-9. New York: IEEE.
42.
BrillAFrankJAKapilaV. Using inertial and visual sensing from a mounted smartphone to stabilize a ball and beam test-bed. In: American Control Conference (ACC 2016), Boston, MA, 6-8 July 2016, pp. 1335-40. New York: IEEE.
43.
PangGLiuH.Evaluation of a low-cost MEMS accelerometer for distance measurement. J Intell Robot Syst. 2001;30(3):249-65.
44.
FedorovABeichelRKalpathy-CramerJFinetJFillion-RobinJCPujolSet al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012;30(9):1323-41.
45.
BergerMS.Ultrasound-guided stereotaxic biopsy using a new apparatus. J Neurosurgery. 1986;65(4):550-4.
46.
GillerCAGillerAM.A new method for fixation of probes for transcranial Doppler ultrasound. J Neuroimaging. 1997;7(2):103-5.
47.
GeeAHHoughtonNETreeceGMPragerRW.A mechanical instrument for 3D ultrasound probe calibration. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2005;31(4):505-18.
48.
HsuPWPragerRWGeeAHTreeceGM.Rapid, easy and reliable calibration for freehand 3D ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2006;32(6):823-35.
49.
HousdenRJGeeAHTreeceGMPragerRW.Sensorless reconstruction of unconstrained freehand 3D ultrasound data. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007;33(3):408-19.
50.
ComeauRMFensterAPetersTM.Integrated MR and ultrasound imaging for improved image guidance in neurosurgery. In: Medical Imaging’98, San Diego, CA, 21January1998, pp. 747-54. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
51.
ComeauRMSadikotAFFensterAPetersTM.Intraoperative ultrasound for guidance and tissue shift correction in image-guided neurosurgery. Med Phys. 2000;27(4):787-800.
52.
HassenpflugPPragerRWTreeceGMGeeAH.Speckle classification for sensorless freehand 3-D ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2005;31(11):1499-508.
53.
ElliotTLDowneyDBTongSMcLeanCAFensterA.Accuracy of prostate volume measurements in vitro using three-dimensional ultrasound. Acad Radiol. 1996;3(5):401-6.
54.
TongSDowneyDCardinalHFensterA.A three-dimensional ultrasound prostate imaging system. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1996;22(6):735-46.
55.
BelohlavekMFoleyDASewardJBGreenleafJF.Three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography: reconstruction algorithm and diagnostic performance of resulting images. In: Visualization in Biomedical Computing 1994, Rochester, MN, 4 October 1994, pp. 680-92. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics.
56.
DelckerATegelerC.Influence of ECG-triggered data acquisition on reliability for carotid plaque volume measurements with a magnetic sensor three-dimensional ultrasound system. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1998;24(4):601-5.
BarrattDCDaviesAHHughesADThomSAHumphriesKN.Optimisation and evaluation of an electromagnetic tracking device for high-accuracy three-dimensional ultrasound imaging of the carotid arteries. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;27(7):957-68.
59.
StolkaPJKangHJChotiMBoctorEM. Multi-DoF probe trajectory reconstruction with local sensors for 2D-to-3D ultrasound. In: 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, Rotterdam, 14-17 April 2010, pp. 316-9. New York: IEEE.
60.
BottenusNLongWZhangHJakovljevicMBradwayDBoctorEet al. Feasibility of swept synthetic aperture ultrasound imaging. IEEE T Med Imaging. 2016;35(7):1676-85.
