Challenges and implications of using ultrasonic communications in intra-body area networks

Body area networks (BANs) promise to enable revolutionary biomedical applications by wirelessly interconnecting devices implanted or worn by humans. However, BAN wireless communications based on radio-frequency (RF) electromagnetic waves suffer from poor propagation of signals in body tissues, which leads to high levels of attenuation. In addition, in-body transmissions are constrained to be low-power to prevent overheating of tissues and consequent death of cells. To address the limitations of RF propagation in the human body, we propose a paradigm shift by exploring the use of ultrasonic waves as the physical medium to wirelessly interconnect in-body implanted devices. Acoustic waves are the transmission technology of choice for underwater communications, since they are known to propagate better than their RF counterpart in media composed mainly of water. Similarly, we envision that ultrasound (e.g., acoustic waves at non-audible frequencies) will provide support for communications in the human body, which is composed for 65% of water. In this paper, we first assess the feasibility of using ultrasonic communications in intra-body BANs, i.e., in-body networks where the devices are biomedical sensors that communicate with an actuator/gateway device located inside the body. We discuss the fundamentals of ultrasonic propagation in tissues, and explore important tradeoffs, including the choice of a transmission frequency, transmission power, bandwidth, and transducer size. Then, we discuss future research challenges for ultrasonic networking of intra-body devices at the physical, medium access and network layers of the protocol stack.

[1]  Robert H. Mellen,et al.  The Thermal‐Noise Limit in the Detection of Underwater Acoustic Signals , 1952 .

[2]  P. Mohana Shankar,et al.  A general statistical model for ultrasonic backscattering from tissues , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[3]  Moe Z. Win,et al.  Ultra-wide bandwidth time-hopping spread-spectrum impulse radio for wireless multiple-access communications , 2000, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[4]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  A survey on wireless body area networks , 2011, Wirel. Networks.

[5]  Ieee Standards Board IEEE standard for safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3kHz to 300 GHz , 1992 .

[6]  Dario Pompili,et al.  Underwater acoustic sensor networks: research challenges , 2005, Ad Hoc Networks.

[7]  Charu Gandhi,et al.  QUALITY OF SERVICE ROUTING IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS USING LOCATION AND ENERGY PARAMETERS , 2009 .

[8]  K. Shung,et al.  Diagnostic Ultrasound: Imaging and Blood Flow Measurements , 2005 .

[9]  Daisuke Takahashi,et al.  Temperature-Aware Routing for Telemedicine Applications in Embedded Biomedical Sensor Networks , 2008, EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw..

[10]  Sandeep K. S. Gupta,et al.  Ayushman: A Wireless Sensor Network Based Health Monitoring Infrastructure and Testbed , 2005, DCOSS.

[11]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  On the relationship between capacity and distance in an underwater acoustic communication channel , 2006, Underwater Networks.

[12]  M. Welsh,et al.  Vital Signs Monitoring and Patient Tracking Over a Wireless Network , 2005, 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference.

[13]  Sandeep K. S. Gupta,et al.  Communication scheduling to minimize thermal effects of implanted biosensor networks in homogeneous tissue , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[14]  M C Ziskin,et al.  The sensitivity of biological tissue to ultrasound. , 1997, Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology.

[15]  D. Blackstock Fundamentals of Physical Acoustics , 2000 .

[16]  Paolo Fiorini,et al.  Human++: Emerging Technology for Body Area Networks , 2006, 2006 IFIP International Conference on Very Large Scale Integration.