Cited by 144Ultrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

The threshold for brain damage in rabbits induced by bursts of ultrasound in the presence of an ultrasound contrast agent (Optison®)

Hynynen, Kullervo, McDannold, Nathan, Martin, Heather, Jolesz, Ferenc A, Vykhodtseva, Natalia·2003·Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that burst ultrasound (US) in the presence of a US contrast agent using parameters similar to those used in brain blood flow measurements causes tissue damage. The brains of 10 rabbits were sonicated in 3-8 locations with 1.5-MHz, 10- micro s bursts repeated at a frequency of 1 kHz at temporal peak acoustic pressure amplitudes ranging from 2 to 12.7 MPa. The total sonication time for each location was 20 s. Before each sonication, a bolus of US contrast agent was injected IV. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) images were obtained after the sonications to detect local enhancement in the brain. Whole brain histological evaluation was performed, and the sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H and E), TUNEL, and vanadium acid fuchsin (VAF) staining to evaluate tissue effects, including apoptosis and ischemia. Both the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast enhancement and histology findings indicated that brain tissue damage was induced at a pressure amplitude level of 6.3 MPa. The damage included vascular wall damage, hemorrhage and, eventually, necrosis. Mild vascular damage was observed localized in a few microscopic tissue volumes in about half of the sonicated locations at all pressure values tested (down to 2 MPa). However, these sonications did not induce any detectable tissue effects, including ischemia or apoptosis. As a conclusion, the study showed that the US exposure levels currently used for…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0301-5629(02)00741-x

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hynynen, K., McDannold, N., Martin, H., Jolesz, F. A., & Vykhodtseva, N.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Venue
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-03
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
473-481
ISSN
0301-5629 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2058265539
Cited by
144
References
31
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 8
FWCI
6.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (R01CA076550, CA76550)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ultrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Photoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
ultrasound contrast agents, Optison, acoustic pressure threshold, blood-brain barrier opening, vascular wall damage, hemorrhage, necrosis, apoptosis, cerebral ischemia, contrast-enhanced MRI, rabbits
MeSH terms
Albumins, Animals, Blood-Brain Barrier, Brain Injuries, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Contrast Media, Fluorocarbons, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Rabbits, Apoptosis, Ultrasonography, Doppler, Transcranial

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review