BSI PD IEC/TS 62791:2015
$198.66
Ultrasonics. Pulse-echo scanners. Low-echo sphere phantoms and method for performance testing of gray-scale medical ultrasound scanners applicable to a broad range of transducer types
| Published By | Publication Date | Number of Pages |
| BSI | 2015 | 64 |
IEC TS 62791:2015(E) defines terms and specifies methods for quantifying the imaging performance of real-time, ultrasound B-mode scanners. The test methodology is applicable for transducers operating in the 2 MHz to 15 MHz frequency range.
PDF Catalog
| PDF Pages | PDF Title |
|---|---|
| 4 | CONTENTS |
| 8 | FOREWORD |
| 10 | INTRODUCTION |
| 12 | 1 Scope 2 Normative references 3 Terms and definitions |
| 14 | 4 Symbols |
| 15 | 5 General and environmental conditions |
| 16 | 6 Equipment required 6.1 General 6.2 Phantom geometries 6.2.1 Phantoms for use in the frequency range 2 MHz to 7 MHz 6.2.2 Phantoms for use in the frequency range 7 MHz to 15 MHz including “micro-convex” arrays |
| 17 | 6.2.3 Total internal-reflection surfaces 6.2.4 Spatially random distribution of low-echo spheres 6.3 Ultrasonic properties of the tissue-mimicking (TM) phantoms |
| 18 | 7 Data acquisition assuming a spatially random distribution of low-echo spheres 7.1 Methodology |
| 19 | 7.2 Storage of digitized image data Figures Figure 1 – Flow chart |
| 20 | 7.3 Digital image files available from the scanner itself 7.4 Image archiving systems 8 Automated data analysis for quantifying low-echo sphere detectability 8.1 General 8.2 Computation of mean pixel values (MPVs) |
| 22 | Figure 2 – Schematic of an image plane |
| 23 | 8.3 Determination of the LSNRm-value for a given depth interval 8.3.1 Preliminaries 8.3.2 Computation of the LSNRn-values and LSNRm-value in a given depth interval 8.3.3 Standard error corresponding to each LSNRn-value |
| 24 | Annexes Annex A (informative) Example of a phantom for performance testing in the 2 MHz to 7 MHz frequency range Figure A.1 – End view of the phantom applicable for 2 MHz to 7 MHz showing the spatially random distribution of 4-mm diameter low-echo spheres |
| 25 | Figure A.2 – Top view of phantom with 4 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres |
| 26 | Annex B (informative) Illustrations of the computation of LSNRm-values as a function of depth Figure B.1 – Convex-array image of a prototype 4 mm-diameter low-echo sphere phantom for use in the 2 MHz to 7 MHz frequency range |
| 27 | Figure B.2 – Auxiliary figures relating to Figure B.1 Figure B.3 – Results corresponding to Figures B.1 and B.2, demonstrating reproducibility |
| 28 | Figure B.4 – Results corresponding to Figures B.1, B.2 and B.3 Figure B.5 – One of 80 parallel linear-array images of the phantom containing 4 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres, at 4 MHz with focus at 3 cm |
| 29 | Figure B.6 – Three successive images of the set of 80, separated by D/4 equal to 1 mm Figure B.7 – Results for the 4 cm-wide, 3 cm-focus,linear array addressed in Figures B.5 and B.6 |
| 30 | Figure B.8 – Results for the 4 cm-wide, 3 cm-focus, linear array addressed in Figures B.5, B.6 and B.7, using all 80 image frames corresponding to Figure B.7 |
| 31 | Annex C (informative) Sufficient number of data images to assure reproducibility of results C.1 General C.2 Phantom with low-echo sphere diameter 3,2 mm, having 2 spheres per millilitre Figure C.1 – One image obtained from a phantom containing 3,2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres by using a 4 MHz linear array focused at 3 cm |
| 32 | Figure C.2 – Reproducibility result for two independent sets of 70 images with a mean number of low-echo sphere centres that is about 15 per 5 mm-depth interval Figure C.3 – Results obtained by using both sets of 70 independent images corresponding to Figure C.2 |
| 33 | Figure C.4 – Sector image (curved array) at 4,5 MHz with multiple foci at 4 cm, 8 cm and 12 cm depths; the low-echo spheres are 3,2 mm in diameter Figure C.5 – Reproducibility results for a multiple-lateral-focus (4 cm, 8 cm and 12 cm) case corresponding to Figure C.4 |
| 34 | C.3 Phantom with 2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres and 8 spheres per millilitre Figure C.6 – Reproducibility results for the case corresponding to Figure C.5, except that there is a single focus at 10 cm depth Figure C.7 – Reproducibility results for the case corresponding to Figure C.5, except that there is a single focus at 4 cm depth |
| 35 | Figure C.8 – Image of the phantom containing 2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres, made with a curved array having 1,5 cm radius of curvature, with its focus at 3 cm Figure C.9 – Reproducibility results corresponding to Figure C.8 |
| 36 | Figure C.10 – Results using all 100 images in the image set that gave rise to Figure C.9 Figure C.11 – Image of the phantom containing 2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres, made with a high-frequency (15 MHz) linear array, laterally focused at 4 cm |
| 37 | Figure C.12 – Reproducibility results corresponding to Figure C.11 Figure C.13 – Results using all 200 images in the image set that gave rise to Figure C.12 |
| 38 | Annex D (informative) Example of a phantom for performance testing in the 7 MHz to 15 MHz frequency range |
| 39 | Figure D.1 – End- and top-view diagrams of the phantom containing 2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres for use in the 7 MHz to 15 MHz frequency range |
| 40 | Figure D.2 – Image obtained by using the phantom containing 2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres and a pediatric transducer with a radius of curvature of about 1,5 cm |
| 41 | Annex E (informative) Determination of low-echo sphere positions to within D/8 in x, y and z Cartesian coordinates E.1 Procedure |
| 42 | E.2 Argument for the choice of seven MPV nearest-neighbour sites for determining the centres of low-echo spheres |
| 43 | Annex F (informative) Test of total internal reflection produced by alumina and plate-glass, plane reflectors |
| 44 | Figure F.1 – Average of 10 images obtained by using a phased array Figure F.2 – Plot of the data with blue data computed in the left rectangle in Figure F.1 and red data computed in the right rectangle |
| 45 | Figure F.3 – Plot of the data when the reflector is on the right side with blue computed in the left rectangle and red computed in the right rectangle |
| 46 | Figure F.4 – The percentage by which the mean pixel values resulting from reflections differ from the mean pixel values not involving reflections |
| 47 | Figure F.5 – Wide sector (153°), 1 cm-radius-of-curvature transducer with alumina reflector on the left Figure F.6 – Plot of the data with blue computed in the left rectangle in Figure F.5 and red computed in the right rectangle |
| 48 | Figure F.7 – Plot of the data when the reflector is on the right side with blue computed in the left rectangle and red computed in the right rectangle Figure F.8 – The percentage by which the mean pixel values resulting from reflections differ from the mean pixel values not involving reflections |
| 50 | Annex G (informative) Results of a test of reproducibility of LSNRm versus depth for a phantom with 4 mm-diameter low-echo spheres and 2 spheres per millilitre Figure G.1 – Example image of the phantom with a 4,2 MHz curved array and two low-echo spheres per millilitre |
| 51 | Figure G.2 – Reproducibility results corresponding to the image set, one of which is shown in Figure G.1 |
| 52 | Annex H (informative) Results for low-echo sphere-concentration dependence of LSNRm versus depth for phantoms with 4 mm-diameter spheres Figure H.1 – Example of an image from the image set giving rise to the results in Figure H.2; the phantom contained an average of one 4 mm-diameter, low-echo sphere per millilitre |
| 53 | Figure H.2 – Results corresponding to an image set,one of which is shown in Figure H.1 Figure H.3 – Example of an image from the data set giving rise to the results in Figure H.4; the phantom contained an averageof two 4 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres per millilitre |
| 54 | Figure H.4 – Results corresponding to an image set,one of which is shown in Figure H.3 |
| 55 | Annex I (informative) Results for low-echo sphere-concentration dependence of LSNRm versus depth for phantoms with 3,2 mm-diameter spheres Figure I.1 – Example of an image from the 4 ml-1 data set producing the results shown in Figure I.2 |
| 56 | Figure I.2 – Results for the phantom containing four 3,2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres per millilitre Figure I.3 – Example of an image from the 2 ml-1 data set producingthe results shown in Figure I.4 |
| 57 | Figure I.4 – Results for the phantom containing two 3,2 mm-diameter, low-echo spheres per millilitre Figure I.5 – Example of an image from the 1 ml-1 data set producing the results shown in Figure I.6 |
| 58 | Figure I.6 – Results for the phantom containing one 3,2 mm-diameter, low-echo sphere per millilitre |
| 59 | Annex J (informative) Comparison of two different makes of scanner with similar transducers and console settings Figure J.1 – Results for System A scanner and 7CF2 3-D (swept convex array) transducer focused at 4 cm and operated at 4,5 MHz in 2-D mode Figure J.2 – Results for System B scanner with a 4DC7-3 3-D (convex array) transducer, operated at 4 MHz in 2-D mode and focused at 4 cm. The sector angle and all other console settings mimicked those for the System A case (Figure J.1) |
| 61 | Annex K (informative) Special considerations for 3-D probes K.1 3-D probes operating in 2-D imaging mode K.2 2-D arrays operating in 3-D imaging mode for determining LSNRm-values as a function of depth for reconstructed images K.3 Mechanically driven 3-D probes operating in 3-D imaging mode |
| 62 | Bibliography |
