Download PDF
Ultraschall Med 2013; 34(5): 422-434
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1335843
Fort- und Weiterbildung
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Ultraschall Emissionen: Thermische (TI) und mechanische (MI) Indizes

C. Kollmann
1   Center for Medical Physics & Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna
,
G. ter Haar
2   Physics Department, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton
,
L. Doležal
3   Institute of Biophysics, Medical Faculty of Palacký University, Olomouc
,
M. Hennerici
4   Neurologische Universitätsklinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim
,
K. Å. Salvesen
5   National Center for Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim
,
L. Valentin
6   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Malmö University Hospital, Malmö
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

16 May 2012

21 April 2013

Publication Date:
16 July 2013 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Fortbildungsziele

  • Kenntnis des allgemeinen Expositionskonzepts und dessen Anwendung

  • Erkennen der Grenzen des Konzepts und dessen Kehrseiten

  • Kenntnis der damit verbundenen Konsequenzen für die Sicherheit

  • Kenntnis der Grenzwerte für TI/MI, die einen Handlungsbedarf nach sich ziehen

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM), National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). Standard for Real-time Display of Thermal and Mechanical Acoustic Output Indices on Diagnostic Ultrasound Equipment. 1st rev. Laurel, MD: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine; Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 1998. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, 1993, Revised 510(k) Diagnostic Ultrasound Guidance for 1993.
    PubMed
  • 2 IEC 62359. Ultrasonics – Field characterization – Test methods for the determination of thermal and mechanical indices related to medical diagnostic ultrasonic fields. International Standard IEC 62359 Ed.2.0, Geneva: 2010-10.
    PubMed
  • 3 Abbott JG. Rationale and derivation of MI and TI: a review. Ultrasound Med Biol 1999; 25: 431-441
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Martin K. The acoustic safety of new ultrasound technologies. Ultrasound 2010; 18: 110-118
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Exposure criteria for medical diagnostic ultrasound: I. Criteria based on thermal mechanisms. NCRP Report No. 113 Bethesda MD: NCRP; 1992
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Ter HG. Results of a Survey of Exposure Conditions used in Ultrasound Scans in the UK, February 2007. Ultrasound 2008; 16: 110-113
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 BMUS. Guidelines for the safe use of diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Safety Group of the British Medical Ultrasound Society. 2009 www.bmus.org
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 ECMUS Safety committee. Clinical Safety Statement for Diagnostic Ultrasound. EFSUMB. www.efsumb.org
    PubMed
  • 9 ECMUS. Safety committee Guidelines. EFSUMB. www.efsumb.org
    PubMed
  • 10 Maršál K. The output display standard: has it missed its target?. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005; 25: 211-4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Sheiner E, Shoham-Vardi I, Abramowicz JS. What do clinical users know regarding safety of ultrasound during pregnancy?. J Ultrasound Med 2007; 26: 319-325
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Akhtar W, Arain MA, Ali A et al. Ultrasound biosafety during pregnancy: what do operators know in the developing world?: national survey findings from Pakistan. J Ultrasound Med 2011; 30: 981-985
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Houston LE, Allsworth J, Macones GA. Ultrasound is safe... right? Resident and maternal-fetal medicine fellow knowledge regarding obstetric ultrasound safety. J Ultrasound Med 2011; 30: 21-27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar