Evaluations of UltraiQ software for objective ultrasound image quality assessment using images from a commercial scanner

We evaluated a commercially available software package that uses B‐mode images to semi‐automatically measure quantitative metrics of ultrasound image quality, such as contrast response, depth of penetration (DOP), and spatial resolution (lateral, axial, and elevational). Since measurement of elevati...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied clinical medical physics 2018-03, Vol.19 (2), p.298-304
Main Authors: Long, Zaiyang, Tradup, Donald J, Stekel, Scott F, Gorny, Krzysztof R, Hangiandreou, Nicholas J
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Automation
image quality
Medical Imaging
objective assessment
Quality control
Scanners
Software packages
Success
UltraiQ
Ultrasonic imaging
ultrasound
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We evaluated a commercially available software package that uses B‐mode images to semi‐automatically measure quantitative metrics of ultrasound image quality, such as contrast response, depth of penetration (DOP), and spatial resolution (lateral, axial, and elevational). Since measurement of elevational resolution is not a part of the software package, we achieved it by acquiring phantom images with transducers tilted at 45 degrees relative to the phantom. Each measurement was assessed in terms of measurement stability, sensitivity, repeatability, and semi‐automated measurement success rate. All assessments were performed on a GE Logiq E9 ultrasound system with linear (9L or 11L), curved (C1‐5), and sector (S1‐5) transducers, using a CIRS model 040GSE phantom. In stability tests, the measurements of contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution remained within a ±10% variation threshold in 90%, 100%, and 69% of cases, respectively. In sensitivity tests, contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution measurements followed the expected behavior in 100%, 100%, and 72% of cases, respectively. In repeatability testing, intra‐ and inter‐individual coefficients of variations were equal to or less than 3.2%, 1.3%, and 4.4% for contrast, DOP, and spatial resolution (lateral and axial), respectively. The coefficients of variation corresponding to the elevational resolution test were all within 9.5%. Overall, in our assessment, the evaluated package performed well for objective and quantitative assessment of the above‐mentioned image qualities under well‐controlled acquisition conditions. We are finding it to be useful for various clinical ultrasound applications including performance comparison between scanners from different vendors.
ISSN:1526-9914
1526-9914
DOI:10.1002/acm2.12255