Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1996
Publication Title
Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Abstract
Acoustic impedance mismatch at the fluid-wall interface was shown to affect the spectra from an intravascular Doppler device in an in vitro model with a diameter typical of human coronary arteries. Measurements were obtained first under Poiseuille flow conditions with impedance mismatches of 0%, 7% and 12%, and then under stenosed conditions for the 0% and 7% mismatch cases. For the zero mismatch case, the Doppler spectra could be readily interpreted in terms of fluid mechanical phenomena. When mismatch was present, the spectra from Poiseuille flow exhibited multiple peaks which could not be directly related to the velocity profile. Also, the spectra from stenosed flow with a mismatch of 7% were similar to those from the zero mismatch case but did not exhibit the specific flow-related features as clearly. These results indicate that the impedance mismatch alters the acoustic environment inside the model and that this causes artifact in the Doppler spectra.
Repository Citation
Jones, S. A.; Leclerc, H.; Chatzimavroudis, George P.; Kim, Y. H.; Scott, N. A.; and Yoganathan, Ajit P., "The Influence of Acoustic Impedance Mismatch on Post-Stenotic Pulsed-Doppler Ultrasound Measurements in a Coronary Artery Model" (1996). Chemical & Biomedical Engineering Faculty Publications. 98.
https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/encbe_facpub/98
Original Citation
Jones SA, Leclerc H, Chatzimavroudis GP, Y. HK, Scott NA, Yoganathan AP. The influence of acoustic impedance mismatch on post-stenotic pulsed-Doppler ultrasound measurements in a coronary artery model. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1996;22:623-634.
Volume
22
Issue
5
DOI
10.1016/0301-5629(96)00025-7
Version
Postprint
Publisher's Statement
NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 22, 5, (1996)] DOI 10.1016/0301-5629(96)00025-7
