Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical uses of microbubbles in diagnosis and treatment

  • Special Issue - Review
  • Published:
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

References

  1. Alonso A, Della Martina A, Stroick M et al (2007) Molecular imaging of human thrombus with novel abciximab immunobubbles and ultrasound. Stroke 38:1508–1514. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.106.471391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alter J, Lou F, Rabinowitz A et al (2006) Systemic delivery of morpholino oligonucleotide restores dystrophin expression bodywide and improves dystrophic pathology. Nat Med 12:175–177. doi:10.1038/nm1345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Armstrong WF, Ryan T (2008) Stress echocardiography from 1979 to present. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 21:22–28. doi:10.1016/j.echo.2007.11.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ascenti G, Gaeta M, Magno C et al (2004) Contrast-enhanced second-harmonic sonography in the detection of pseudocapsule in renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1525–1530

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barnett SB, Duck F, Ziskin M (2007) WFUMB symposium on safety of ultrasound in medicine: conclusions and recommendations on biological effects and safety of ultrasound contrast agents, 2006. Ultrasound Med Biol 33:233–234. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Becher H, Schlief R (1989) Improved sensitivity of color Doppler by SH U 454. Am J Cardiol 64:374–377. doi:10.1016/0002-9149(89)90538-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Becker H, Burns P (2000) Handbook of contrast echocardiography. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  8. Behm C, Lindner J (2006) Cellular and molecular imaging with targeted contrast ultrasound. Ultrasound Q 22:67–72

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berry J, Sidhu P (2004) Microbubble contrast-enhanced ultrasound in liver transplantation. Eur Radiol 14:96–103. doi:10.1007/s10406-004-0082-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bhatia VK, Senior R (2008) Contrast echocardiography: evidence for clinical use. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 21:409–416. doi:10.1016/j.echo.2008.01.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cassano E, Rizzo S, Bozzini A et al (2006) Contrast enhanced ultrasound of breast cancer. Cancer Imaging 6:4–6. doi:10.1102/1470-7330.2006.0001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Catalano O, Sandomenico F, Matarazzo I et al (2005) Contrast-enhanced sonography of the spleen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:1150–1156

    Google Scholar 

  13. Celli N, Gaiani S, Piscaglia F et al (2007) Characterization of liver lesions by real-time contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 19:3–14. doi:10.1097/01.meg.0000250585.53608.3c

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen M, Yang W, Yan K et al (2007) The role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in planning treatment protocols for hepatocellular carcinoma before radiofrequency ablation. Clin Radiol 62:752–760. doi:10.1016/j.crad.2006.12.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Choi BI, Kim TK, Han JK et al (2000) Vascularity of hepatocellular carcinoma: assessment with contrast-enhanced second-harmonic versus conventional power Doppler US. Radiology 214:381–386

    Google Scholar 

  16. Choi D, Lim HK, Lee WJ et al (2003) Early assessment of the therapeutic response to radio frequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: utility of gray scale harmonic ultrasonography with a microbubble contrast agent. J Ultrasound Med 22:1163–1172

    Google Scholar 

  17. Claudon M, Plouin PF, Baxter GM et al (2000) Renal arteries in patients at risk of renal arterial stenosis: multicenter evaluation of the echo-enhancer SH U 508A at color and spectral Doppler US. Levovist Renal Artery Stenosis Study Group. Radiology 214:739–746

    Google Scholar 

  18. Claudon M, Cosgrove D, Albrecht T et al (2008) Guidelines and good clinical practice recommendations for contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)—update 2008. Ultraschall Med 29:28–44. doi:10.1055/s-2007-963785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cosgrove D (1995) TRUS with contrast agents in carcinoma of the prostate. In: Murphy G, Khoury S, Chatelain C, Dennis L (eds) Fourth international symposium on recent advances in urological cancer. Scientific Communications International, Jersey, pp 131–140

  20. Cosgrove D (2004) Future prospects for SonoVue and CPS. Eur Radiol 14:116–124. doi:10.1007/s10406-004-0084-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cosgrove D (2006) Ultrasound contrast agents: an overview. Eur J Radiol 60:324–330. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.06.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. D’Arcy TJ, Jayaram V, Lynch M et al (2004) Ovarian cancer detected non-invasively by contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasound. BJOG 111:619–622. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00157.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. D’Onofrio M, Zamboni G, Faccioli N et al (2007) Ultrasonography of the pancreas. 4. Contrast-enhanced imaging. Abdom Imaging 32:171–181. doi:10.1007/s00261-006-9010-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Darge K, Troeger J, Duetting T et al (1999) Reflux in young patients: comparison of voiding US of the bladder and retrovesical space with echo enhancement versus voiding cystourethrography for diagnosis. Radiology 210:201–207

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dayton PA, Rychak JJ (2007) Molecular ultrasound imaging using microbubble contrast agents. Front Biosci 12:5124–5142. doi:10.2741/2553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. DeMaria AN, Narula J, Mahmud E et al (2006) Imaging vulnerable plaque by ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 47:C32–C39. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.11.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Dietrich CF, Schuessler G, Trojan J et al (2005) Differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma by contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Br J Radiol 78:704–707. doi:10.1259/bjr/88181612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dijkmans P, Visser C, Kamp O (2005) Adverse reactions to ultrasound contrast agents: is the risk worth the benefit? Eur J Echocardiogr 6:363–366. doi:10.1016/j.euje.2005.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dill-Macky J (2006) Aortic endografts: detecting endoleaks using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Ultrasound Q 22:49–52

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dill-Macky MJ, Wilson SR, Sternbach Y et al (2007) Detecting endoleaks in aortic endografts using contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:W262–W268. doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Drighil A, El Mosalami H, Elbadaoui N et al (2007) Patent foramen ovale: a new disease? Int J Cardiol 122:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2006.12.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Eggers J (2008) Transcranial Doppler ultrasound enhances the efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis in patients with middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke

  33. European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (2004) Public statement on SonoVue: new contraindication in patients with heart disease

  34. FDA (2007) Information for healthcare professionals

  35. Feinstein S, Heidenreich P, Dick C et al (1988) Albunex: a new intravascular ultrasound contrast agent: preliminary safety and efficacy results. Circulation 78(Suppl II):565

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ferrara K, Pollard R, Borden M (2007) Ultrasound microbubble contrast agents: fundamentals and application to gene and drug delivery. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 9:415–447. doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.8.061505.095852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fienstein S (2007) Letter to the FDA: black box warning on Definity and Optison

  38. Folkman J (1995) Angiogenesis in cancer, vascular, rheumatoid and other disease. Nat Med 1:27–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gramiak R, Shah P (1968) Echocardiography of the aortic root. Invest Radiol 3:356–366. doi:10.1097/00004424-196809000-00011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Halpern EJ (2006) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging of prostate cancer. Rev Urol 8(Suppl 1):S29–S37

    Google Scholar 

  41. Harvey CJ, Albrecht T (2001) Ultrasound of focal liver lesions. Eur Radiol 11:1578–1593. doi:10.1007/s003300101002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Harvey CJ, Blomley MJ, Eckersley RJ et al (2001) Developments in ultrasound contrast media. Eur Radiol 11:675–689. doi:10.1007/s003300000624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Huang P, Wang Z, Huang F et al (2009) Analysis of Neovascularization within carotid plaques in patients with cerebral infarction using contrast-enhanced ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol (in press)

  44. Ikonomidis I, Holmes E, Nihoyannopoulos P (1998) Assessment of left ventricular wall motion after intravenous injection of Albunex during dobutamine stress echocardiography. Coron Artery Dis 9:567–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kaneko Y, Maruyama T, Takegami K et al (2005) Use of a microbubble agent to increase the effects of high intensity focused ultrasound on liver tissue. Eur Radiol 15:1415–1420. doi:10.1007/s00330-005-2663-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kaufmann BA, Wei K, Lindner JR (2007) Contrast echocardiography. Curr Probl Cardiol 32:51–96. doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2006.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Klibanov AL (2007) Ultrasound molecular imaging with targeted microbubble contrast agents. J Nucl Cardiol 14:876–884. doi:10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.09.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Klibanov AL, Hughes MS, Villanueva FS et al (1999) Targeting and ultrasound imaging of microbubble-based contrast agents. MAGMA 8:177–184. doi:10.1007/BF02594596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Konopke R, Bunk A, Kersting S (2007) The role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for focal liver lesion detection: an overview. Ultrasound Med Biol 33:1515–1526. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.04.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Krenning BJ, Kirschbaum SW, Soliman OI et al (2007) Comparison of contrast agent-enhanced versus non-contrast agent-enhanced real-time three-dimensional echocardiography for analysis of left ventricular systolic function. Am J Cardiol 100:1485–1489. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.06.042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Krix M (2005) Quantification of enhancement in contrast ultrasound: a tool for monitoring of therapies in liver metastases. Eur Radiol Suppl 15:104–108. doi:10.1007/s10406-005-0172-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kusnetzky L, Khalid A, Khumri T et al (2008) Acute mortality in hospitalized patients undergoing echocardiography with and without an ultrasound contrast agent: results in 18, 671 consecutive studies. J Am Coll Cardiol 51:1704–1706. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2008.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Lamuraglia M, Escudier B, Chami L et al (2006) To predict progression-free survival and overall survival in metastatic renal cancer treated with sorafenib: pilot study using dynamic contrast-enhanced Doppler ultrasound. Eur J Cancer 42:2472–2479. doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2006.04.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Lassau N, Roche A (2007) Imaging and angiogenesis: DCE-US (dynamic contrast enhanced-ultrasonography). Bull Cancer 94(Spec No):S247–S253

    Google Scholar 

  55. Lassau N, Lamuraglia M, Chami L et al (2006) Gastro-intestinal stromal tumours treated with Imatinib: monitoring response with contrast enhanced ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:1267–1273. doi:10.2214/AJR.05.1192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Lechat P, Mas JL, Lascault G et al (1988) Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with stroke. N Engl J Med 318:1148–1152

    Google Scholar 

  57. Leen E, Ceccotti P, Kalogeropoulou C et al (2006) Prospective multicenter trial evaluating a novel method of characterizing focal liver lesions using contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1551–1559. doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Li T, Tachibana K, Kuroki M (2003) Gene transfer with echo-enhanced contrast agents: comparison between Albunex, Optison, and Levovist in mice—initial results. Radiology 229:423–428. doi:10.1148/radiol.2292020500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Liang HD, Lu QL, Xue SA et al (2004) Optimisation of ultrasound-mediated gene transfer (sonoporation) in skeletal muscle cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 30:1523–1529. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2004.08.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Main ML, Goldman JH, Grayburn PA (2007) Thinking outside the “box”-the ultrasound contrast controversy. J Am Coll Cardiol 50:2434–2437. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Malm S, Frigstad S, Sagberg E et al (2004) Accurate and reproducible measurement of left ventricular volume and ejection fraction by contrast echocardiography: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 44:1030–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. McKinlay AE (ed) (2007) Effects of ultrasound and infrasound relevant to human health. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 93:1–420. doi:10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2006.07.002

  63. Meloni MF, Livraghi T, Filice C et al (2006) Radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors: the role of microbubble ultrasound contrast agents. Ultrasound Q 22:41–47

    Google Scholar 

  64. Miller DL, Averkiou MA, Brayman AA et al (2008) Bioeffects considerations for diagnostic ultrasound contrast agents. J Ultrasound Med 27:611–632

    Google Scholar 

  65. Moir S, Marwick TH (2004) Combination of contrast with stress echocardiography: a practical guide to methods and interpretation. Cardiovasc Ultrasound 2:15–25. doi:10.1186/1476-7120-2-15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Moir S, Shaw L, Haluska B et al (2007) Left ventricular opacification for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease with stress echocardiography: an angiographic study of incremental benefit and cost-effectiveness. Am Heart J 154:510–518. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2007.04.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Moran C, Watson R, Fox A et al (2002) In vitro acoustic characterisation of four intravenous ultrasonic contrast agents at 30 MHz. Ultrasound Med Biol 28:785–791. doi:10.1016/S0301-5629(02)00520-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Nemes A, Geleijnse ML, Krenning BJ et al (2007) Usefulness of ultrasound contrast agent to improve image quality during real-time three-dimensional stress echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 99:275–278. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.08.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Ng K, Liu Y (2002) Therapeutic ultrasound: its application in drug delivery. Med Res Rev 22:204–223. doi:10.1002/med.10004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Nicolau C, Vilana R, Bru E (2004) The use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the management of the cirrhotic patient and for detection of HCC. Eur Radiol 14:63–72. doi:10.1007/s00330-004-2298-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Nishioka T, Luo H, Fishbein MC et al (1997) Dissolution of thrombotic arterial occlusion by high intensity, low frequency ultrasound and dodecafluoropentane emulsion: an in vitro and in vivo study. J Am Coll Cardiol 30:561–568. doi:10.1016/S0735-1097(97)00182-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Padhani AR, Ollivier L (2001) The RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) criteria: implications for diagnostic radiologists. Br J Radiol 74:983–986

    Google Scholar 

  73. Piscaglia F, Bolondi L (2006) The safety of Sonovue in abdominal applications: retrospective analysis of 23188 investigations. Ultrasound Med Biol 32:1369–1375. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.05.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Piscaglia F, Corradi F, Mancini M et al (2007) Real time contrast enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detection of liver metastases from gastrointestinal cancer. BMC Cancer 7:171–184. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-7-171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Quaia E, Degobbis F, Tona G et al (2004) Differential patterns of contrast enhancement in different focal liver lesions after injection of the microbubble US contrast agent SonoVue. Radiol Med (Torino) 107:155–165

    Google Scholar 

  76. Quaia E, Palumbo A, Rossi S et al (2006) Characterization of liver tumors insonated at low transmit power after microbubble contrast agent injection: comparison of visual and quantitative analysis in diagnostic performance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1560–1570. doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Quaia E, D’Onofrio M, Palumbo A et al (2006) Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in metastatic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and confidence. Eur Radiol 16:1599–1609. doi:10.1007/s00330-006-0192-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Robotti D, Cammarota T, Debani P et al (2004) Activity of Crohn disease: value of Color-Power-Doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. Abdom Imaging 29:652–678. doi:10.1007/s00261-003-0157-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Schneider M (2008) Molecular imaging and ultrasound-assisted drug delivery. J Endourol 22:795–802. doi:10.1089/end.2007.9821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Schumann PA, Christiansen JP, Quigley RM et al (2002) Targeted-microbubble binding selectively to GPIIb IIIa receptors of platelet thrombi. Invest Radiol 37:587–593. doi:10.1097/00004424-200211000-00001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Schwenger V, Hinkel UP, Nahm AM et al (2006) Real-time contrast-enhanced sonography in renal transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 20(Suppl 17):51–54. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0012.2006.00600.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Senior R, Becher H, Monaghan M et al (2009) Contrast echocardiography: evidence and guidelines for clinical use. Eur J Echocardiogr (in press)

  83. Shimoni S, Frangogiannis NG, Aggeli CJ et al (2003) Identification of hibernating myocardium with quantitative intravenous myocardial contrast echocardiography: comparison with dobutamine echocardiography and thallium-201 scintigraphy. Circulation 107:538–544. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.0000047211.53448.12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Solbiati L, Ierace T, Tonolini M et al (2004) Guidance and monitoring of radiofrequency liver tumor ablation with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. Eur J Radiol 51(Suppl):S19–S23. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.03.035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Soliman OI, Geleijnse ML, Meijboom FJ et al (2007) The use of contrast echocardiography for the detection of cardiac shunts. Eur J Echocardiogr 8:S2–S12. doi:10.1016/j.euje.2007.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Soman P, Lahiri A, Senior R (2000) Safety of an intravenous second generation contrast agent in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Heart Vessels 84:634–635

    Google Scholar 

  87. Strunk H, Stuckmann G, Frohlich E et al (1998) Native and signal-enhanced power Doppler sonography for characterization of liver lesions. Rontgenstr Fortschr 168:344–351. doi:10.1055/s-2007-1015140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Tachibana K, Tachibana S (1995) Albumin microbubble echo-contrast material as an enhancer for ultrasound accelerated thrombolysis. Circulation 92:1148–1150

    Google Scholar 

  89. Tatlidede AD, Oflazoglu B, Celik SE et al (2007) Prevalence of patent foramen ovale in patients with migraine. Agri 19:39–42

    Google Scholar 

  90. Thorelius L (2004) Contrast enhanced ultrasound in trauma. Eur Radiol 14:43–52. doi:10.1007/s10406-004-0078-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Torzilli G (2004) Contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography in surgery for liver tumors. Eur J Radiol 51(Suppl):S25–S29. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.03.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Torzilli G, Del Fabbro D, Palmisano A et al (2007) Contrast-enhanced intraoperative ultrasonography: a valuable and not any more monocentric diagnostic technique performed in different ways. Ann Surg 245:152–153 (author reply 152–153). doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000250940.21627.57

    Google Scholar 

  93. Tousek P, Penicka M, Tintera J et al (2007) Identification of hibernating myocardium with myocardial contrast echocardiography: Comparison with late gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance. Int J Cardiol 128:117–120. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2007.05.113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. van Wamel A, Kooiman K, Harteveld M et al (2006) Vibrating microbubbles poking individual cells: drug transfer into cells via sonoporation. J Control Release 112:149–155. doi:10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Villanueva FS, Lu E, Bowry S et al (2007) Myocardial ischemic memory imaging with molecular echocardiography. Circulation 115:345–352. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.633917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. von Bibra H, Sutherland G, Becher H et al (1995) Clinical usefulness of left heart Doppler contrast enhancement by saccharide-based transpulmonary contrast agent. The Levovist Cardiac Working Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 25:500–508. doi:10.1016/0735-1097(94)00404-E

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. von Herbay A, Haeussinger D, Gregor M et al (2007) Characterization and detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): comparison of the ultrasound contrast agents SonoVue (BR 1) and Levovist (SH U 508A). Ultraschall Med 28:168–175. doi:10.1055/s-2007-963070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Ward M, Wu J, Chiu JF (1999) Ultrasound-induced cell lysis and sonoporation enhanced by contrast agents. J Acoust Soc Am 105:2951–2957. doi:10.1121/1.426908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Watanabe A, Otake R, Nozaki T et al (2008) Effects of microbubbles on ultrasound-mediated gene transfer in human prostate cancer PC3 cells: comparison among Levovist, YM454, and MRX-815H. Cancer Lett 265:107–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Wiesmann M, Bergmann-Käster C, Kreft B et al (2004) Renal perfusion imaging using contrast-enhanced phase-inversion ultrasound. Clin Nephrol 62:423–431

    Google Scholar 

  101. Wilson SR, Burns PN (2006) An algorithm for the diagnosis of focal liver masses using microbubble contrast-enhanced pulse-inversion sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:1401–1412. doi:10.2214/AJR.04.1920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Xu HX, Lu MD, Liu GJ et al (2006) Imaging of peripheral cholangiocarcinoma with low-mechanical index contrast-enhanced sonography and SonoVue: initial experience. J Ultrasound Med 25:23–33

    Google Scholar 

  103. Xu H, Xie X, Lu M et al (2008) Unusual benign focal liver lesions: findings on real-time contrast-enhanced sonography. J Ultrasound Med 27:243–254

    Google Scholar 

  104. Yanagisawa K, Moriyasu F, Miyahara T et al (2007) Phagocytosis of ultrasound contrast agent microbubbles by Kupffer cells. Ultrasound Med Biol 33:318–325. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Imperial College, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK

    David Cosgrove & Chris Harvey

Authors
  1. David Cosgrove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chris Harvey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Cosgrove.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cosgrove, D., Harvey, C. Clinical uses of microbubbles in diagnosis and treatment. Med Biol Eng Comput 47, 813–826 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-009-0434-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-009-0434-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation