Effects of different hydrostatic pressure on lesions in ex vivo bovine livers induced by high intensity focused ultrasound.

It is well-known that acoustic cavitation associated with the high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment often would change the morphology and size of lesions in its treatment. In most studies reported in literature, high ambient hydrostatic pressure was used to suppress the cavitation completely. Investigation of the effects by varying the ambient hydrostatic pressure (P) is still lacking. In this paper, the effects of HIFU on lesions in ex vivo bovine liver specimens under various P are systematically investigated. A 1MHz HIFU transducer, with an aperture diameter of 70mm and a focal length of 55mm, was used to generate two groups US exposure of different acoustic intensities and exposure time (6095W/cm×8s and 9752W/cm×5s), while keeping the same acoustic energies per unit area (48760J/cm). The peak acoustic negative pressures (p) of the two groups were p=9.58MPa and p=10.82MPa, respectively, with the difference p=p-p=1.24MPa. A passive cavitation detection (PCD) was used to monitor the ultrasonic cavitation signal during exposure of the two groups. The US exposures were done under the following ambient hydrostatic pressures, P: atmospheric pressure, 0.5MPa, 1.0MPa, 1.5MPa, 2.0MPa, 2.5MPa and3.0MPa, respectively. The result of PCD showed that there was a statistically significant increase above background noise level in broadband emissions at dose of 9752W/cm×5s, but not at dose of 6095W/cm×8s under atmospheric pressure; i.e., the acoustic cavitation took place for p but not for p when under atmospheric pressure. The results also showed that there was no statistically difference of the morphology and size of lesions for 6095W/cm×8s exposure under the aforementioned different ambient hydrostatic pressures. But the lesions generated at 9752W/cm×5s exposure under P=atmospheric pressure, 0.5MPa, 1.0MPa (all of them are less than p), were larger than those under 1.5MPa, 2.0MPa, 2.5MPa and 3.0MPa (all of them are over than p) which were consistence with 6095W/cm×8s group. It was concluded that when P>p, the acoustic cavitation was suppressed and prompted that there was no need to elevate P higher than p to suppress the acoustic cavitation in tissue, just need P higher than p.