Power Doppler signal calibration in the finger joint between two models of ultrasound machine: a pilot study using a phantom and joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. (October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sakano, Ryosuke; Saito, Katsumi; Kamishima, Tamotsu; Nishida, Mutsumi; Horie, Tatsunori; Noguchi, Atsushi; Kono, Michihito; Sutherland, Kenneth; Atsumi, Tatsuya
• Is Part Of: Acta radiologica. Volume 58:Number 10(2017:Oct.)
• Page Start: 1238
• Page End: 1244
• Publication Date: 2017-10
• Subjects: Power Doppler -- signal calibration -- finger joint -- phantom -- rheumatoid arthritis; Radiology, Medical -- Periodicals; Radiography, Medical -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; 616.0757
• DOI: 10.1177/0284185116685923
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0284-1851

Abstract

Background: Despite the advantages of ultrasound (US) in the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, power Doppler (PD) US may be highly dependent on the type of US machine used. Purpose: To present a method to calibrate the PD signal of two models of US machines by use of a flow phantom and finger joints of patients with RA. Material and Methods: For the phantom study, the PD signal count was measured in the flow phantom perfusing blood mimicking fluid at various injection rates and pulse repetition frequencies (PRFs). The quantitative PD index was calculated with ImageJ. For the clinical study, the second and third metacarpophalangeal joints of five consecutive patients with RA were examined. The quantitative PD index was measured at various PRFs by use of two models of machine (the same models as the phantom study). Results: For the phantom and clinical studies, negative correlations were found between the PRF and the quantitative PD index when the flow velocity was constant and positive correlations between flow velocity and the quantitative PD index at constant PRF. There was a significant difference in the depiction performance of synovial blood flow between the two models, which can be calibrated by adjusting the PRF values derived from the phantom study in each model. Conclusion: Signal calibration of pannus vascularity between US machines may be possible by adjusting the PRF value according to flow phantom data. Different US machines can thus provide equivalent examination results concerning the pannus vascularity.