Use of phantoms and test objects for local dynamic range evaluation in medical ultrasounds: A preliminary study

In the ultrasound image the relationship between echo amplitudes and gray levels is expressed by means of the Grayscale Mapping Function (GMF), that is the greyscale transfer function associated with the echo displayed. The GMF allows the determination of some image quality parameters and quantities, among which the Local Dynamic Range (LDR) is relevant, since it is defined as the 20·log10 of the ratio of the minimum echo amplitude that yields the maximum grey level in the digitized image to that of the echo that yields the lowest grey level at the same location in the image and the same settings. This study reports the implementation of a method for the automatic determination of the LDR on medical ultrasound scanners and its application by means of a commercial grayscale ultrasound phantom, nevertheless it can be used also with general purpose phantoms: the LDR is obtained from the estimation of the GMF, based on processing of a sequence of uncompressed bidimensional ultrasound images provided by the scanner. In the manuscript, some theoretical considerations have been done to determine the GMF and its fitting model, as well as the LDR values, after that an experimental setup is described and some results are shown for an ultrasound system equipped with two different probes

[1]  H Lopez,et al.  Frequency independent ultrasound contrast-detail analysis. , 1985, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[2]  N M Gibson,et al.  A computerised quality control testing system for B-mode ultrasound. , 2001, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[3]  Andrea Scorza,et al.  Calibration procedure for performance evaluation of clinical Pulsed Doppler Systems , 2012 .

[4]  Stephen Russell,et al.  BMUS guidelines for the regular quality assurance testing of ultrasound scanners by sonographers , 2014, Ultrasound.

[5]  J. Galo,et al.  A preliminary study on a method for objective uniformity assessment in diagnostic ultrasound imaging , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (I2MTC) Proceedings.

[6]  Silvia Conforto,et al.  A Preliminary Comparison of Two Different Methods for Objective Uniformity Evaluation in Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging , 2016 .

[7]  Andrea Scorza,et al.  A novel approach to a phantom based method for maximum depth of penetration measurement in diagnostic ultrasound: a preliminary study , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) Proceedings.

[8]  A. Scorza,et al.  Performance tests of sonographic instruments for the measure of flow speed , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Workshop on Imaging Systems and Techniques.

[9]  Peter Graham Fish Physics and Instrumentation of Diagnostic Medical Ultrasound , 1990 .

[10]  Ian Farrance,et al.  Uncertainty in measurement: a review of monte carlo simulation using microsoft excel for the calculation of uncertainties through functional relationships, including uncertainties in empirically derived constants. , 2014, The Clinical biochemist. Reviews.

[11]  Andrew Chen,et al.  Comparison of GUM and Monte Carlo methods for evaluating measurement uncertainty of perspiration measurement systems , 2016 .

[12]  S Conforto,et al.  A Comparative Study on the Influence of Probe Placement on Quality Assurance Measurements in B-mode Ultrasound by Means of Ultrasound Phantoms , 2015, The open biomedical engineering journal.

[13]  Silvia Conforto,et al.  A texture analysis approach for objective uniformity evaluation in diagnostic ultrasound imaging: A preliminary study , 2015, 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[14]  P M Harris,et al.  Software specifications for uncertainty evaluation. , 2006 .

[15]  P L Carson,et al.  Real-time B-mode ultrasound quality control test procedures. Report of AAPM Ultrasound Task Group No. 1. , 1998, Medical physics.

[16]  Andrea Scorza A novel method for automatic evaluation of the effective dynamic range of medical ultrasound scanners , 2009 .

[17]  A Scorza,et al.  Comparative evaluation of ultrasound scanner accuracy in distance measurement. , 2012, The Review of scientific instruments.