[Ultrasound Contrast Agents--physical Basics]

Overview

Journal Radiologe

Specialty Radiology

Date 2005 Apr 6

PMID 15809841

Citations 1

Authors

C Kollmann

M Putzer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The concept of ultrasound contrast agents (UCA) is based on the inherent physical and acoustical properties of gas-filled microbubbles within an ultrasonic (US) field. Depending on the magnitude of the incident US wave different scattering behavior occurs. While it is linear for low acoustic pressures, increasing it leads to the occurrence of nonlinear effects, such as emission of harmonics. High pressure results in destruction of the bubbles producing a highly nonlinear echo signal. Using these specific acoustic signatures opens new perspectives for the development of bubble-specific imaging techniques such as harmonic or intermittent imaging. This review deals with the physical properties of the gas-filled microbubbles, their behavior within an ultrasonic field, and the use of the bubbles' acoustic signatures for contrast-specific imaging. Novel applications such as tissue-specific microbubbles, targeted imaging, and therapeutic applications using the bubbles as vehicles for drug or gene delivery are discussed as well as acoustically induced bioeffects and considerations for the safe use of UCA from an acoustic standpoint.

Citing Articles

[Quantitative methods in sonography].

Jenderka K, Delorme S Radiologe. 2019; 59(11):1019-1034.

PMID: 31642935 DOI: 10.1007/s00117-019-00602-3.

References

Lanza G, Wickline S . Targeted ultrasonic contrast agents for molecular imaging and therapy. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2001; 44(1):13-31. DOI: 10.1053/pcad.2001.26440. View

Hetzel G . [Current developments in ultrasound technology]. Radiologe. 2003; 43(10):777-92. DOI: 10.1007/s00117-003-0959-7. View

Ter Haar G . Ultrasonic contrast agents: safety considerations reviewed. Eur J Radiol. 2002; 41(3):217-21. DOI: 10.1016/s0720-048x(01)00456-9. View

Liang H, Blomley M . The role of ultrasound in molecular imaging. Br J Radiol. 2004; 76 Spec No 2:S140-50. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/57063872. View

Dijkmans P, Juffermans L, Musters R, van Wamel A, Ten Cate F, van Gilst W . Microbubbles and ultrasound: from diagnosis to therapy. Eur J Echocardiogr. 2004; 5(4):245-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.euje.2004.02.001. View

Correas J, Bridal L, Lesavre A, Mejean A, Claudon M, Helenon O . Ultrasound contrast agents: properties, principles of action, tolerance, and artifacts. Eur Radiol. 2001; 11(8):1316-28. DOI: 10.1007/s003300100940. View

Unger E, Matsunaga T, McCreery T, Schumann P, Sweitzer R, Quigley R . Therapeutic applications of microbubbles. Eur J Radiol. 2002; 42(2):160-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0720-048x(01)00455-7. View

Unger E, Hersh E, Vannan M, Matsunaga T, McCreery T . Local drug and gene delivery through microbubbles. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2001; 44(1):45-54. DOI: 10.1053/pcad.2001.26443. View

Schutt E, Klein D, Mattrey R, Riess J . Injectable microbubbles as contrast agents for diagnostic ultrasound imaging: the key role of perfluorochemicals. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 2003; 42(28):3218-35. DOI: 10.1002/anie.200200550. View

10.

Jenne J . [Cavitations in biological tissues]. Ultraschall Med. 2001; 22(5):200-7. DOI: 10.1055/s-2001-17913. View

11.

Postema M, van Wamel A, Lancee C, de Jong N . Ultrasound-induced encapsulated microbubble phenomena. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2004; 30(6):827-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2004.02.010. View

12.

GRAMIAK R, Shah P . Echocardiography of the aortic root. Invest Radiol. 1968; 3(5):356-66. DOI: 10.1097/00004424-196809000-00011. View

13.

Rosenfeld E . [Non-thermal non-cavitational effects of ultrasound]. Ultraschall Med. 2003; 24(1):40-4. DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-37411. View

14.

Frinking P, Bouakaz A, Kirkhorn J, Ten Cate F, de Jong N . Ultrasound contrast imaging: current and new potential methods. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2000; 26(6):965-75. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-5629(00)00229-5. View

15.

Dayton P, Klibanov A, Brandenburger G, Ferrara K . Acoustic radiation force in vivo: a mechanism to assist targeting of microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1999; 25(8):1195-201. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-5629(99)00062-9. View

16.

Goldberg B, Liu J, Forsberg F . Ultrasound contrast agents: a review. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1994; 20(4):319-33. DOI: 10.1016/0301-5629(94)90001-9. View

17.

Miller A, Nanda N . Contrast echocardiography: new agents. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2004; 30(4):425-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2003.12.002. View

18.

Abbott J . Rationale and derivation of MI and TI--a review. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1999; 25(3):431-41. DOI: 10.1016/s0301-5629(98)00172-0. View

19.

de Jong N, Bouakaz A, Ten Cate F . Contrast harmonic imaging. Ultrasonics. 2002; 40(1-8):567-73. DOI: 10.1016/s0041-624x(02)00171-3. View

20.

Bloch S, Dayton P, Ferrara K . Targeted imaging using ultrasound contrast agents. Progess and opportunities for clinical and research applications. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 2004; 23(5):18-29. DOI: 10.1109/memb.2004.1360405. View