banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
AAPM Task Group 128: Quality assurance tests for prostate brachytherapy ultrasound systems
Rent this article for


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Prostate brachytherapy transrectal ultrasound probe. In (a), note dual connectors required for the orthogonal axial and longitudinal arrays. In (b), the white arrow indicates the axial array and the striped arrow indicates the longitudinal array.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Test setup. The transrectal ultrasound probe is shown passing under the needle template. Both are fixed to the stepper, which is connected to a stabilizing arm locked to the treatment table. The CIRS Brachytherapy Phantom is used in this example.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Phantom schematic. This is the CIRS Model 45 phantom, and is used here for illustrative purposes only; no endorsement is implied.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Grayscale determination. (a) Measurement using discrete steps. The arrowheads indicate the maximum range of discrete steps visible. (b) Measurement using a grayscale gradient. The limits of the visible range are indicated by the plus signs and the length between them indicated at the bottom of the image.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Depth of penetration measurement. In this example, the maximum depth, indicated by the (solid arrow) is approximately (dotted arrow). The marker is located at the position where the speckle of the phantom is overcome by the electronic noise of the system.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Resolution using single filament targets. In (a), axial resolution is demonstrated with the axial array, while (b) demonstrates lateral resolution with the axial array. In (c) axial resolution using the longitudinal array is demonstrated, and (d) demonstrates lateral resolution using the longitudinal array. Note the loss of lateral resolution with depth in (b) due to the targets being out of the focal zone of the transducer. Axial resolution is seen to be constant with depth in (a) as axial resolution is primarily dependent upon the frequency of the transducer.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Resolution using paired filament targets. The axial and lateral separation of the nylon fibers are , , , , . A transducer frequency of is used in (a) and in (b). Note the improved axial resolution with the higher frequency in (b).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Phantom containing high contrast fibers for distance verification.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Axial distance measurement accuracy. Ideally, the fibers should be centered in the field of view. If this is not possible, image a column of fibers and note that the horizontal spatial calibration also contributes to the measured vertical distance. When using the electronic calipers for a vertical distance measurement, place the caliper centered on or along the right or left side (be consistent) and centered vertically with respect to the target image.

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Measurements of horizontal distance accuracy when several rows of targets are available. For a horizontal distance measurement, the calipers should be placed just above or below the target and centered horizontally with respect to the target. It is critical to be consistent in placement of the caliper with respect to the target image.

Image of FIG. 11.
FIG. 11.

Distance accuracy measurements using a cylindrical, sphere, or egg-shaped object. (a) Axial distance measurement; (b) lateral distance measurement.

Image of FIG. 12.
FIG. 12.

Using an electronically generated grid to verify distance accuracy throughout the field, of view. Note that fibers near the transducer are rendered farther apart than corresponding grid points. The lateral distance registration at deeper depths is more accurate.

Image of FIG. 13.
FIG. 13.

Volume measurement using a target of known volume.

Image of FIG. 14.
FIG. 14.

Artifact caused by poor contact between the ultrasound probe and the scan surface. In this case, the source of poor contact is insufficient coupling gel, leaving an air gap between the probe and scan surface.

Image of FIG. 15.
FIG. 15.

The displayed depth will not be correct if the scan plane is not perpendicular to the fiber targets. The illustration on the right shows a greater distance from the probe to the target due to the orientation of the probe.

Image of FIG. 16.
FIG. 16.

The top illustration shows the circular cross section of the cylindrical target when the scan plane is perpendicular to the axis of the target. The lower illustration shows an elongated image due to the orientation of the probe. Distance measurements recorded from this image would not correctly reflect the performance of the imager.

Image of FIG. 17.
FIG. 17.

A ring-down artifact generated by imaging a needle. Note that the “tail” of the artifact always points along a scan line and away from the transducer.

Image of FIG. 18.
FIG. 18.

A time sequence showing the formation of a ring-down artifact. Echoes that correspond to the “true” image of the objects are recorded at the times labeled 3 and 5 in the illustration. However, as the pulse continues to “ping pong” between the two interfaces, additional echoes reach the transducer and appear as equally spaced artifacts on the image. Additionally, the pulse continuously loses intensity as it travels; therefore, the artifact appears to taper off with depth.


Generic image for table

Sound speed of selected materials (Ref. 10).

Generic image for table

Quality control tests: frequencies and action levels.

Generic image for table

Percent error associated with vertical (axial) distance accuracy measurements due to material speed of sound.

Generic image for table

Percent error for distance measurements with various caliper misplacements.


Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: AAPM Task Group 128: Quality assurance tests for prostate brachytherapy ultrasound systems