Testing of Doppler Ultrasound Systems

Blood and tissue velocities are measured and analyzed in cardiac, vascular, and other applications of diagnostic ultrasound. Errors in system performance might give invalid measurements. We developed two moving string test targets and a rotating cylinder phantom (Doppler phantoms) to characterize Doppler ultrasound systems. These phantoms were initially used to measure such variables as sample volume dimensions, location of the sample volume, and the performance of the spectral analysis. Later, specific tests were designed and performed to detect errors in signal processing, causing time delays and inaccurate velocity estimation in all Doppler modes. In cardiac motion pattern even time delays as short as 30 ms may have clinical relevance. These delays can be obtained with echocardiography by using flow and tissue Doppler and M-mode techniques together with external signals (e.g., electrocardiography (ECG) and phonocardiography). If one or more of these signals are asynchronous in relation to the other signals, an incorrect definition of cardiac time intervals may occur. To determine if such time delays in signal processing are a serious problem, we tested four commercial ultrasound systems. We used the Doppler string phantom and the rotating cylinder phantom to obtain test signals. We found time delays of up to 90 ms in one system, whereas delays were mostly short in the other systems. Further, the time delays varied relative to system settings. In two-dimensional (2D) Doppler the delays were closely related to frame rate. To determine the accuracy in velocity calibration, we tested the same four ultrasound systems using the Doppler phantoms to obtain test signals for flow (PW) and tissue (TPW) pulse Doppler and for continuous wave (CW) Doppler. The ultrasound systems were tested with settings and transducers commonly used in cardiac applications. In two systems, the observed errors were mostly close to zero, whereas one system systematically overestimated velocity by an average of 4.6%. The detected errors are mostly negliable in clinical practice but might be significant in certain cases and research applications.