292 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33008649)
1. Monodisperse versus Polydisperse Ultrasound Contrast Agents: In Vivo Sensitivity and safety in Rat and Pig.
Helbert A; Gaud E; Segers T; Botteron C; Frinking P; Jeannot V
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2020 Dec; 46(12):3339-3352. PubMed ID: 33008649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Monodisperse Versus Polydisperse Ultrasound Contrast Agents: Non-Linear Response, Sensitivity, and Deep Tissue Imaging Potential.
Segers T; Kruizinga P; Kok MP; Lajoinie G; de Jong N; Versluis M
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2018 Jul; 44(7):1482-1492. PubMed ID: 29705522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Controlled Shrinkage of Microfluidically Generated Microbubbles by Tuning Lipid Concentration.
Zalloum IO; Paknahad AA; Kolios MC; Karshafian R; Tsai SSH
Langmuir; 2022 Nov; 38(43):13021-13029. PubMed ID: 36260341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dependence of sonoporation efficiency on microbubble size: An in vitro monodisperse microbubble study.
van Elburg B; Deprez J; van den Broek M; De Smedt SC; Versluis M; Lajoinie G; Lentacker I; Segers T
J Control Release; 2023 Nov; 363():747-755. PubMed ID: 37778466
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Acoustic Characterization and Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging of Long-Circulating Lipid-Coated Microbubbles.
Li H; Yang Y; Zhang M; Yin L; Tu J; Guo X; Zhang D
J Ultrasound Med; 2018 May; 37(5):1243-1256. PubMed ID: 29127707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Improved Sensitivity of Ultrasound-Based Subharmonic Aided Pressure Estimation Using Monodisperse Microbubbles.
van Hoeve W; de Vargas Serrano M; Te Winkel L; Forsberg F; Dave JK; Sarkar K; Wessner CE; Eisenbrey JR
J Ultrasound Med; 2022 Jul; 41(7):1781-1789. PubMed ID: 34724241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sensitivity improvement of subharmonic-based pressure measurement using phospholipid-coated monodisperse microbubbles.
Wang P; Tan C; Ji X; Bai J; Yu ACH; Qin P
Ultrason Sonochem; 2024 Mar; 104():106830. PubMed ID: 38432151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Acoustic responses of monodisperse lipid-encapsulated microbubble contrast agents produced by flow focusing.
Kaya M; Feingold S; Hettiarachchi K; Lee AP; Dayton PA
Bubble Sci Eng Technol; 2010 Dec; 2(2):33-40. PubMed ID: 21475641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of Bubble Concentration on the in Vitro and in Vivo Performance of Highly Stable Lipid Shell-Stabilized Micro- and Nanoscale Ultrasound Contrast Agents.
Abenojar EC; Nittayacharn P; de Leon AC; Perera R; Wang Y; Bederman I; Exner AA
Langmuir; 2019 Aug; 35(31):10192-10202. PubMed ID: 30913884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Combining Ultrasound and Capillary-Embedded T-Junction Microfluidic Devices to Scale Up the Production of Narrow-Sized Microbubbles through Acoustic Fragmentation.
Khan AH; Jiang X; Kaushik A; Nair HS; Edirisinghe M; Mercado-Shekhar KP; Shekhar H; Dalvi SV
Langmuir; 2022 Aug; 38(33):10288-10304. PubMed ID: 35943351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Ultrasound contrast agents: basic principles.
Calliada F; Campani R; Bottinelli O; Bozzini A; Sommaruga MG
Eur J Radiol; 1998 May; 27 Suppl 2():S157-60. PubMed ID: 9652516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Acoustic characterization of monodisperse lipid-coated microbubbles: relationship between size and shell viscoelastic properties.
Parrales MA; Fernandez JM; Perez-Saborid M; Kopechek JA; Porter TM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1077. PubMed ID: 25190383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Italian Society of Cardiovascular Echography (SIEC) Consensus Conference on the state of the art of contrast echocardiography.
Ital Heart J; 2004 Apr; 5(4):309-34. PubMed ID: 15185894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of the Superharmonic Response of Microbubble Contrast Agents for Acoustic Angiography as a Function of Microbubble Parameters.
Newsome IG; Kierski TM; Dayton PA
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Sep; 45(9):2515-2524. PubMed ID: 31174922
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Optimizing Sensitivity of Ultrasound Contrast-Enhanced Super-Resolution Imaging by Tailoring Size Distribution of Microbubble Contrast Agent.
Lin F; Tsuruta JK; Rojas JD; Dayton PA
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2017 Oct; 43(10):2488-2493. PubMed ID: 28668636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Controllable Formation of Monodisperse Polymer Microbubbles as Ultrasound Contrast Agents.
Song R; Peng C; Xu X; Wang J; Yu M; Hou Y; Zou R; Yao S
ACS Appl Mater Interfaces; 2018 May; 10(17):14312-14320. PubMed ID: 29637761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A novel technology: microfluidic devices for microbubble ultrasound contrast agent generation.
Lin H; Chen J; Chen C
Med Biol Eng Comput; 2016 Sep; 54(9):1317-30. PubMed ID: 27016369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Three Decades of Ultrasound Contrast Agents: A Review of the Past, Present and Future Improvements.
Frinking P; Segers T; Luan Y; Tranquart F
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2020 Apr; 46(4):892-908. PubMed ID: 31941587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Stable and transient subharmonic emissions from isolated contrast agent microbubbles.
Biagi E; Breschi L; Vannacci E; Masotti L
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2007 Mar; 54(3):480-97. PubMed ID: 17375818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Targeted Ultrasound Contrast Imaging of Tumor Vasculature With Positively Charged Microbubbles.
Diakova GB; Du Z; Klibanov AL
Invest Radiol; 2020 Nov; 55(11):736-740. PubMed ID: 32569011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
