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.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Integrated ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for simultaneous temperature and cavitation monitoring during focused ultrasound therapies
2. E. Martin, D. Jeanmonod, A. Morel, E. Zadicario, and B. Werner, “High-intensity focused ultrasound for noninvasive functional neurosurgery,” Ann. Neurol. 66, 858–861 (2009).
4. E. G. Moros, J. Penagaricano, P. Novak, W. L. Straube, and R. J. Myerson, “Present and future technology for simultaneous superficial thermoradiotherapy of breast cancer,” Int. J. Hyperthermia 26, 699–709 (2010).
5. S. Dromi et al., “Pulsed-high intensity focused ultrasound and low temperature-sensitive liposomes for enhanced targeted drug delivery and antitumor effect,” Clin. Cancer Res. 13, 2722–2727 (2007).
6. M. de Smet, E. Heijman, S. Langereis, N. M. Hijnen, and H. Grull, “Magnetic resonance imaging of high intensity focused ultrasound mediated drug delivery from temperature-sensitive liposomes: An in vivo proof-of-concept study,” J. Controlled Release 150, 102–110 (2011).
8. E. Guilhon et al., “Spatial and temporal control of transgene expression in vivo using a heat-sensitive promoter and MRI-guided focused ultrasound,” J. Gene Med. 5, 333–342 (2003).
10. S. J. Monteith, N. F. Kassell, O. Goren, and S. Harnof, “Transcranial MR-guided focused ultrasound sonothrombolysis in the treatment of intracerebral hemorrhage,” Neurosurg. Focus 34(5), E14–E21 (2013).
11. A. D. Maxwell, C. A. Cain, A. P. Duryea, L. Yuan, H. S. Gurm, and Z. Xu, “Noninvasive thrombolysis using pulsed ultrasound cavitation therapy - histotripsy,” Ultrasound Med. Biol. 35, 1982–1994 (2009).
13. N. Rapoport, Z. Gao, and A. Kennedy, “Multifunctional nanoparticles for combining ultrasonic tumor imaging and targeted chemotherapy,” J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 99, 1095–1106 (2007).
15. G. J. Czarnota et al., “Tumor radiation response enhancement by acoustical stimulation of the vasculature,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, E2033–E2041 (2012).
18. R. G. Holt and R. A. Roy, “Measurements of bubble-enhanced heating from focused, MHz-frequency ultrasound in a tissue-mimicking material,” Ultrasound Med. Biol. 27, 1399–1412 (2001).
21. C. R. Jensen, R. W. Ritchie, M. Gyongy, J. R. Collin, T. Leslie, and C. C. Coussios, “Spatiotemporal monitoring of high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy with passive acoustic mapping,” Radiology 262, 252–261 (2012).
22. C. H. Farny, R. G. Holt, and R. A. Roy, “Temporal and spatial detection of HIFU-induced inertial and hot-vapor cavitation with a diagnostic ultrasound system,” Ultrasound Med. Biol. 35, 603–615 (2009).
23. T. Yu, G. Wang, K. Hu, P. Ma, J. Bai, and Z. Wang, “A microbubble agent improves the therapeutic efficiency of high intensity focused ultrasound: A rabbit kidney study,” Urol. Res. 32(1), 14–19 (2004).
25. R. D. Peters, R. S. Hinks, and R. M. Henkelman, “Ex vivo tissue-type independence in proton-resonance frequency shift MR thermometry,” Magn. Reson. Med. 40, 454–459 (1998).
26. K. Kuroda, A. H. Chung, K. Hynynen, and F. A. Jolesz, “Calibration of water proton chemical shift with temperature for noninvasive temperature imaging during focused ultrasound surgery,” J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 8, 175–181 (1998).
28. V. Rieke, K. K. Vigen, G. Sommer, B. L. Daniel, J. M. Pauly, and K. Butts, “Referenceless PRF shift thermometry,” Magn. Reson. Med. 51, 1223–1231 (2004).
29. J. K. Enholm, M. O. Kohler, B. Quesson, C. Mougenot, C. T. W. Moonen, and S. D. Sokka, “Improved volumetric MR-HIFU ablation by robust binary feedback control,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57(1), 103–113 (2010).
31. A. A. Atchley, L. A. Frizzell, R. E. Apfel, C. K. Holland, S. Madanshetty, and R. A. Roy, “Thresholds for cavitation produced in water by pulsed ultrasound,” Ultrasonics 26, 280–285 (1988).
32. P. P. Lele, Effects of Ultrasound on “Solid” Mammalian Tissues and Tumors in Vivo (Plenum, New York, 1987).
33. T. G. Leighton, The Acoustic Bubble (Academic, San Diego, 1997).
34. M. Bazan-Peregrino, C. D. Arvanitis, B. Rifai, L. W. Seymour, and C. C. Coussios, “Ultrasound-induced cavitation enhances the delivery and therapeutic efficacy of an oncolytic virus in an in vitro model,” J. Controlled Release 157, 235–242 (2012).
36. C. D. Arvanitis, M. S. Livingstone, N. Vykhodtseva, and N. McDannold, “Controlled ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier disruption using passive acoustic emissions monitoring,” PLoS ONE 7(9), e45783–e45798 (2012).
37. N. McDannold, N. Vykhodtseva, and K. Hynynen, “Targeted disruption of the blood-brain barrier with focused ultrasound: Association with cavitation activity,” Phys. Med. Biol. 51, 793–807 (2006).
38. Y. S. Tung, F. Vlachos, J. J. Choi, T. Deffieux, K. Selert, and E. E. Konofagou, “In vivo transcranial cavitation threshold detection during ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier opening in mice,” Phys. Med. Biol. 55, 6141–6155 (2010).
40. V. A. Salgaonkar, S. Datta, C. K. Holland, and T. D. Mast, “Passive cavitation imaging with ultrasound arrays,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 126, 3071–3083 (2009).
41. J. Gateau, J.-F. Aubry, M. Pernot, M. Fink, and M. Tanter, “Combined passive detection and ultrafast active imaging of cavitation events induced by short pulses of high-intensity ultrasound,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 58(3), 517–532 (2011).
42. J. Gateau, J.-F. Aubry, D. Chauvet, A.-L. Boch, M. Fink, and M. Tanter, “In vivo bubble nucleation probability in sheep brain tissue,” Phys. Med. Biol. 56(22), 7001–7015 (2011).
43. F. Wu et al., “Extracorporeal high intensity focused ultrasound ablation in the treatment of patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma,” Ann. Surg. Oncol. 11(12), 1061–1069 (2004).
44. S. Peng et al., “Clinical utility of a microbubble-enhancing contrast (‘SonoVue’) in treatment of uterine fibroids with high intensity focused ultrasound: A retrospective study,” Eur. J. Radiol. 81(12), 3832–3838 (2012).
46. R. M. Jones, M. A. O’Reilly, and K. Hynynen, “Transcranial passive acoustic mapping with hemispherical sparse arrays using CT-based skull-specific aberration corrections: A simulation study,” Phys. Med. Biol. 58(14), 4981–5005 (2013).
47. K. Hynynen et al., “500-element ultrasound phased array system for noninvasive focal surgery of the brain: A preliminary rabbit study with ex vivo human skulls,” Magn. Reson. Med. 52(1), 100–107 (2004).
48. S. J. Norton, B. J. Carr, and A. J. Witten, “Passive imaging of underground acoustic sources,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 2840–2847 (2006).
50. N. McDannold, C. D. Arvanitis, N. Vykhodtseva, and M. S. Livingstone, “Temporary disruption of the blood–brain barrier by use of ultrasound and microbubbles: Safety and efficacy evaluation in rhesus macaques,” Cancer Res. 72(14), 3652–3663 (2012).
51. N. McDannold, E. J. Park, C. S. Mei, E. Zadicario, and F. Jolesz, “Evaluation of three-dimensional temperature distributions produced by a low-frequency transcranial focused ultrasound system within ex vivo human skulls,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 57, 1967–1976 (2010).
52. F. A. Duck, “Acoustic properties of tissue at ultrasonic frequencies,” in Physical Properties of Tissue. A Comprehensive Reference Book (Academic, London, 1990).
53. D. Jeanmonod et al., “Transcranial magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound: Noninvasive central lateral thalamotomy for chronic neuropathic pain,” Neurosurg. Focus 32(1), E1–E11 (2012).
55. M. Gyongy and C. C. Coussios, “Passive cavitation mapping for localization and tracking of bubble dynamics,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 128, EL175–EL180 (2010).
56. N. Rangwala and X. J. Zhou, “Reduction of fast spin echo cusp artifact using a slice-tilting gradient,” Magn. Reson. Med. 64, 220–228 (2010).
57. C. H. Farny, R. Glynn Holt, and R. A. Roy, “The correlation between bubble-enhanced HIFU heating and cavitation power,” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 57, 175–184 (2010).
58. T. D. Mast, V. A. Salgaonkar, C. Karunakaran, J. A. Besse, S. Datta, and C. K. Holland, “Acoustic emissions during 3.1 MHz ultrasound bulk ablation in vitro,” Ultrasound Med. Biol. 34, 1434–1448 (2008).
59. C.-C. Wu, C.-N. Chen, M.-C. Ho, W.-S. Chen, and P.-H. Lee, “Using the acoustic interference pattern to locate the focus of a high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) transducer,” Ultrasound Med. Biol. 34(1), 137–146 (2008).
60. S. Hilgenfeldt, D. Lohse, and M. Zomack, “Sound scattering and localized heat deposition of pulse-driven microbubbles,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 107, 3530–3539 (2000).
62. M. Gunther and D. A. Feinberg, “Ultrasound-guided MRI: Preliminary results using a motion phantom,” Magn. Reson. Med. 52, 27–32 (2004).
63. C. D. Arvanitis, M. S. Livingstone, and N. McDannold, “Combined ultrasound and MR imaging to guide focused ultrasound therapies in the brain,” Phys. Med. Biol. 58(14), 4749–4761 (2013).
64. K. R. Gorny, N. J. Hangiandreou, G. K. Hesley, B. S. Gostout, K. P. McGee, and J. P. Felmlee, “MR guided focused ultrasound: Technical acceptance measures for a clinical system,” Phys. Med. Biol. 51(12), 3155–3173 (2006).
66. F. Marquet et al., “Non-invasive transcranial ultrasound therapy based on a 3D CT scan: Protocol validation and in vitro results,” Phys. Med. Biol. 54(9), 2597–2613 (2009).
Article metrics loading...
Ultrasound can be used to noninvasively produce different bioeffects via viscous heating, acoustic cavitation, or their combination, and these effects can be exploited to develop a wide range of therapies for cancer and other disorders. In order to accurately localize and control these different effects,
imaging methods are desired that can map both temperature changes and cavitation activity. To address these needs, the authors integrated an ultrasound imaging array into an MRI-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) system to simultaneously visualize thermal and mechanical effects via passive acoustic mapping (PAM) and MR temperature imaging (MRTI), respectively.
The system was tested with an MRgFUS system developed for transcranial sonication for brain tumor ablation in experiments with a tissue mimicking phantom and a phantom-filledex vivo macaque skull. In experiments on cavitation-enhanced heating, 10 s continuous wave sonications were applied at increasing power levels (30–110 W) until broadband acoustic emissions (a signature for inertial cavitation) were evident. The presence or lack of signal in the PAM, as well as its magnitude and location, were compared to the focal heating in the MRTI. Additional experiments compared PAM with standard B-mode ultrasound imaging and tested the feasibility of the system to map cavitation activity produced during low-power (5 W) burst sonications in a channel filled with a microbubble
ultrasound contrast agent.
When inertial cavitation was evident, localized activity was present in PAM and a marked increase in heating was observed in MRTI. The location of the cavitation activity and heating agreed on average after registration of the two imaging modalities; the distance between the maximum cavitation activity and focal heating was −3.4 ± 2.1 mm and −0.1 ± 3.3 mm in the axial and transverse ultrasound array directions, respectively. Distortions and other MRI issues introduced small uncertainties in the PAM/MRTI registration. Although there was substantial variation, a nonlinear relationship between the average intensity of the cavitation maps, which was relatively constant during sonication, and the peak temperature rise was evident. A fit to the data to an exponential had a correlation coefficient (R2) of 0.62. The system was also found to be capable of visualizing cavitation activity with B-mode imaging and of passively mapping cavitation activity transcranially during cavitation-enhanced heating and during low-power sonication with an ultrasound contrast agent.
The authors have demonstrated the feasibility of integrating an ultrasound imaging array into an MRgFUS system to simultaneously map localized cavitation activity and temperature. The authors anticipate that this integrated approach can be utilized to develop controllers for cavitation-enhanced ablation and facilitate the optimization and development of this and other ultrasound therapies. The integrated system may also provide a useful tool to study the bioeffects of acoustic cavitation.
Full text loading...
Most read this month