Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

From: <kirvine@sa*.ne*>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 06:04:50 -0400
To: "William M. Smithers" <will@tr*.co*>
CC: "Don W." <donw_s11@sw*.ne*>, techdiver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Subject: Re: Lurker revealed...
Kidding about the tech info - you can't pass up a good piece of tech,
and this guy has some good info here.

William M. Smithers wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 kirvine@sa*.ne* wrote:
> 
> > Don, how about the bad news: what are the sizes of the bubbles we are
> > hearing? By the way my boy Smithers here is not half the geek he is
> > pretending to be, but giving him information like this is tantamount to
> > feeding the dog at the dinner table.
> >
> 
> George, you completely lost me on that one...
> 
> -Will
> 
> 
> > Don W. wrote:
> > >
> > > Will,
> > >
> > > Micron range bubbles would be pretty tough, because the red blood cells
are
> > > 6-8 Microns.  Any bubbles smaller than that would be lost in the noise
> > > generated by the blood cells themselves.  (see http://www.wadsworth.org/
> > > chemheme/heme/microscope/rbc.htm)  As a side note, I've imaged myself in
> > > the lab many times, and noticed that after several drinks, the blood
> > > cells tend to clump together and you can actually see the clumps come
> > > through on the machine.  Kind of disconcerting, and convinces you to drink
> > > lots of water after a party ;-)
> > >
> > > The resolution limit for ultrasound depends on the wavelength of the
> > > ultrasound wave.  This is determined by its frequency, and the speed of
> > > sound propagation in tissue (~1540 m/s for soft tissue).
> > >
> > > For example, a 10Mhz probe would transmit a wavelength of 154 microns
> > > making it difficult to image anything smaller due to diffraction effects.
> > > (Tells you something about the size of those blood clumps I was seeing
> > > doesn't it?)  You can go to higher frequency probes, but the problem is
> > > that the attenuation goes up with the frequency, and pretty soon your
> > > not seeing anything but the air/skin boundary.
> > >
> > > The good news is that 154 microns is pretty small.  It's ~.006 inches
which
> > > is about the thickness of a piece of paper (well 1.5 pieces of paper).
> > >
> > > Anyway, back to your question of how hard it would be to automatically
> > > capture bubble counts from imaging.  I don't know how to do it, but that
> > > doesn't mean that someone else doesn't.  I think you could set up an
> > > _audio_ counter on a laptop with a sound card pretty easily to keep
> > > from having to count the bubbles manually.
> > >
> > > Later,
> > >
> > > Don W.
> > >
> > > William M. Smithers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 17 Aug 1999, Don W. wrote:
> > > > > Oh yeah, and I spent ~two years designing ultrasound
> > > > > machines for
> > > > > Siemens so I know a little about doppler echocardiography and bubble
> > > > > studies.
> > > >
> > > > Hi, Don!  Welcome.  Being an EE with various twisted experience myself,
> > > > I've got a question for you.  I've been audio-dopplering myself for a
> > > > couple of years with a 3Mhz obstetric probe.  That's kindof a scary
> > > > thing, as I've come to realize - virtually *all* of the deco
> > > > data (research papers) have used the same device, and
> > > > base their studies on audio bubble-counts.  I figure that's probably
> > > > due to the grad-student agreeable price of an audio unit.
> > > >
> > > > How hard would it be to construct a device that *precisely* captures
> > > > bubble-counts?  Hell, I figure if they can get pre-natal visual
> > > > imaging down, including user software that measures various
> > > > bone lengths and predicts fetal age, then a system to catch passing
> > > > aeortic bubble counts couldn't be all that tough.  And more importantly,
> > > > what's the resolution of the technology?  I'd really like to detect
> > > > micron range bubbles.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > -Will
> > > --
> > > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> > > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> >
> >
> >


--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]