Comparison of phased array strategies for ultrasound surgery

Hong Wan, Philip VanBaren, Emad Ebbini, Charles Cain

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articlepeer-review

Abstract

The possibility of using phased array generated multiple-focus patterns to reduce the overall treatment time in ultrasound surgery while restraining prefocal heating was investigated by simulating the performance of different possible schemes, i.e., single-focus scans, multiple-focus scans, and simultaneous multiple focusing without scanning, when used to 'ablate' a 10×10×10 mm3 volume 100 mm deep. In all cases, forty-one foci were used to cover the treatment volume. Multiple-focus scans were arranged into nine groups which were scanned in a raster fashion, as with single-focus scans. Keeping the treatment time constant, the maximum intensities, maximum thermal doses, dose distributions and prefocal heating zones for the different schemes were compared. It was found that the non-scanned simultaneous multiple-focus case required the smallest maximum intensity and dose, and resulted in the most even dose distribution. Single-focus raster scanning of individual lesions, as currently used with fixed-focus transducers, gave the worst results. These results show that multiple-focus patterns help considerably in reducing the maximum intensity and dose, and in generating a more even dose distribution assuming the same treatment time and prefocal heating. Alternatively, they can be used to significantly reduce treatment time while keeping the maximum intensity and prefocal heating below predetermined limits.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1623-1628
Number of pages6
JournalProceedings of the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium
Volume2
StatePublished - Dec 1 1995
EventProceedings of the 1995 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Part 1 (of 2) - Seattle, WA, USA
Duration: Nov 7 1995Nov 10 1995

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of phased array strategies for ultrasound surgery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this