296 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21722933)
1. In vitro evaluation of the impact of ultrasound scanner settings and contrast bolus volume on time-intensity curves.
Gauthier TP; Chebil M; Peronneau P; Lassau N
Ultrasonics; 2012 Jan; 52(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 21722933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Perfusion quantification using dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound: the impact of dynamic range and gain on time-intensity curves.
Gauthier TP; Averkiou MA; Leen EL
Ultrasonics; 2011 Jan; 51(1):102-6. PubMed ID: 20643467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Quantitative evaluation of microvascular blood flow by contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).
Greis C
Clin Hemorheol Microcirc; 2011; 49(1-4):137-49. PubMed ID: 22214685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Investigation of the relationship of nonlinear backscattered ultrasound intensity with microbubble concentration at low MI.
Lampaskis M; Averkiou M
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2010 Feb; 36(2):306-12. PubMed ID: 20045592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A simple method for quantifying ultrasound-triggered microbubble destruction.
Hung SH; Yeh CK; Tsai TH; Chen T; Chen RC
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2011 Jun; 37(6):949-57. PubMed ID: 21546152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of malignant liver tumors: biphasic MS-CT versus quantitative contrast harmonic imaging ultrasound.
Clevert DA; Jung EM; Stock KF; Weckbach S; Feuerbach S; Reiser M; Jung F
Z Gastroenterol; 2009 Dec; 47(12):1195-202. PubMed ID: 19960397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of the Reproducibility of Bolus Transit Quantification With Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Across Multiple Scanners and Analysis Software Packages-A Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance Study.
Averkiou MA; Juang EK; Gallagher MK; Cuevas MA; Wilson SR; Barr RG; Carson PL
Invest Radiol; 2020 Oct; 55(10):643-656. PubMed ID: 32898356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Renal blood flow quantification in pigs using contrast-enhanced ultrasound: an ex vivo study.
Hoeffel C; Mulé S; Huwart L; Frouin F; Jais JP; Helenon O; Correas JM
Ultraschall Med; 2010 Aug; 31(4):363-9. PubMed ID: 20408121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound using real-time contrast harmonic imaging in invasive breast cancer: comparison of enhancement dynamics with three different doses of contrast agent.
Saracco A; Szabó BK; Aspelin P; Leifland K; Tánczos E; Wilczek B; Axelsson R
Acta Radiol; 2015 Jan; 56(1):34-41. PubMed ID: 24445092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Assessment of global liver blood flow with quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound.
Gauthier TP; Wasan HS; Muhammad A; Owen DR; Leen EL
J Ultrasound Med; 2011 Mar; 30(3):379-85. PubMed ID: 21357560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantification of hepatic parenchymal blood flow by contrast ultrasonography with flash-replenishment imaging.
Metoki R; Moriyasu F; Kamiyama N; Sugimoto K; Iijima H; Xu HX; Aoki T; Miyata Y; Yamamoto K; Kudo K; Shimizu M; Yamada M
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2006 Oct; 32(10):1459-66. PubMed ID: 17045864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In vitro analysis of ultrasound second generation contrast agent diluted in saline solution.
Goddi A; Novario R; Tanzi F; Di Liberto R; Nucci P
Radiol Med; 2004; 107(5-6):569-79. PubMed ID: 15195019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A method to expedite data acquisition for multiple spatial-temporal analyses of tissue perfusion by contrast-enhanced ultrasound.
Hansen C; Hüttebräuker N; Wilkening W; Ermert H
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2009 Mar; 56(3):507-19. PubMed ID: 19411210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound parametric maps to evaluate intratumoral vascularization.
Pitre-Champagnat S; Leguerney I; Bosq J; Peronneau P; Kiessling F; Calmels L; Coulot J; Lassau N
Invest Radiol; 2015 Apr; 50(4):212-7. PubMed ID: 25275834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of contrast agent-enhanced versus non-contrast agent-enhanced real-time three-dimensional echocardiography for analysis of left ventricular systolic function.
Krenning BJ; Kirschbaum SW; Soliman OI; Nemes A; van Geuns RJ; Vletter WB; Veltman CE; Ten Cate FJ; Roelandt JR; Geleijnse ML
Am J Cardiol; 2007 Nov; 100(9):1485-9. PubMed ID: 17950813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Echo-power estimation from log-compressed video data in dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging.
Payen T; Coron A; Lamuraglia M; Le Guillou-Buffello D; Gaud E; Arditi M; Lucidarme O; Bridal SL
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2013 Oct; 39(10):1826-37. PubMed ID: 23879926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Development and evaluation of a phantom for dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging.
Brauweiler R; Eisa F; Hupfer M; Nowak T; Kolditz D; Kalender WA
Invest Radiol; 2012 Aug; 47(8):462-7. PubMed ID: 22717880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound with low mechanical index: a new technique.
Dietrich CF; Ignee A; Frey H
Z Gastroenterol; 2005 Nov; 43(11):1219-23. PubMed ID: 16267707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of flow parameters to analyse bolus kinetics of ultrasound contrast enhancement in a capillary flow model.
Cangür H; Meyer-Wiethe K; Seidel G
Ultraschall Med; 2004 Dec; 25(6):418-21. PubMed ID: 15597234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Time-intensity-based quantification of vascularity with single-level dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasonography: a pilot animal study.
Li J; Dong BW; Yu XL; Wang XH; Li CF
J Ultrasound Med; 2005 Jul; 24(7):975-83. PubMed ID: 15972712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
