A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Differences in definity and optison microbubble destruction rates at a similar mechanical index with different real-time perfusion systems. | LitMetric

The purpose of this study was to determine microbubble responses to different pulse sequence schemes that exist on low mechanical index (MI) real-time perfusion imaging systems using either intravenous albumin-coated (Optison) or lipid-encapsulated (Definity) microbubbles. A tissue-mimicking phantom was created that permitted insonation of microbubbles at 3 cm (near field) and 9 cm (far field) from the diagnostic transducer face. Differences in effluent microbubble concentration were measured after they passed through vessels being insonified with pulse sequence schemes that transmitted alternating polarity (pulse inversion Doppler), alternating amplitude (power modulation), or both (contrast pulse sequencing) at a similar MI, frame rate, and transmit frequency. Normalized contrast signal intensity within a recirculating chamber was also measured in the near and far field. Pulse inversion Doppler produced less initial normalized contrast signal intensity and greater destruction rates than amplitude varying pulse sequence schemes like power modulation or contrast pulse sequencing at both the 0.1- and 0.2-MI settings. These differences indicate that the same MI setting on different real-time perfusion imaging techniques will produce different microbubble responses.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/j.echo.2003.07.001DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

real-time perfusion
12
pulse sequence
12
sequence schemes
12
destruction rates
8
mechanical real-time
8
microbubble responses
8
perfusion imaging
8
pulse inversion
8
inversion doppler
8
power modulation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!