Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Jul 2;20(7):e0324801. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324801

Monitoring high-intensity focused ultrasound thermal therapy by ultrasound doppler imaging using twinkling artifact

Amirhossein Jamallivani 1, Hamid Behnam 1,*, Jahangir Tavakkoli 2,3
Editor: Kisoo Kim4
PMCID: PMC12221069  PMID: 40601600

Abstract

High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) is a non-invasive therapeutic modality that uses high-energy acoustic waves to thermally coagulate tissue at the focal region. The Twinkling Artifact (TA) is a color Doppler artifact caused by the acoustic radiation force and the consequent tissue vibration during Doppler imaging. This paper aims to employ TA for real-time detection and monitoring of HIFU-induced lesions. A dataset gathered in a previous study concerning ex vivo porcine tissue samples was used, in which the real-time backscattered radiofrequency signals were acquired before, during, and after HIFU treatment. To investigate the presence of TA in Doppler images, the amplitude of each pixel is considered in the sequence of frames as time-series or slow-time signals. It is shown that the main frequency of slow-time signals represents the Doppler frequency shift. Doppler images were constructed using the maximum frequency from every 10-sample slow-time signal. By constructing Doppler images, the frequency shifts within tissue during HIFU treatment were visually and analytically assessed. Our frequency analysis of RF data confirmed the occurrence of TA during HIFU exposure. Furthermore, a novel method was developed for lesion formation monitoring, with less than a 5% error rate in depth and width measurements for depicting coagulated tissue dimensions.

1. Introduction

In recent years, the development of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) has inspired great hopes in revolutionizing non-invasive medical treatments. HIFU uses a focused transducer to emit high-energy acoustic waves to heat and coagulate tissue within a focal region. HIFU has demonstrated promising research trials in therapeutic applications and has even found some clinical applications. To broaden the applications of HIFU in clinical procedures, developing real-time methods for detecting and monitoring thermal lesions is essential [1].

Despite its potential, a significant challenge persists. The primary difficulty involves devising a detection and monitoring technique that not only detects coagulated tissue accurately but also provides quantitative distinctions between the coagulated tissue and its surrounding unexposed tissue in real-time during treatment. Such capabilities are critical to ensure the safety and efficacy of HIFU procedures, as noted in previous studies [2].

In the last two decades, several studies have focused on HIFU thermal lesion detection, including Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) [36] and ultrasound imaging [7]. Among these, ultrasound B-mode imaging is the simplest method for HIFU lesion detection [8]. Compared to MRI-guided methods, ultrasound imaging offers advantages such as lower cost, portability, compatibility with HIFU exposure, and a simple therapy setup. HIFU lesions are indicated by an increase in brightness in B-mode ultrasound images [8].

Although ultrasound-based methods have advantages over their MRI-based counterparts, employing ultrasound for temperature measurements faces significant challenges due to nonlinear responses [9,10], thermal expansion, variations in attenuation and absorption [1113], and different sound speeds across tissue types [14]. The HIFU-induced thermal lesions were effectively detected by Nakagami parametric imaging, based on the distribution of ultrasound backscattered signals [15].

The time series analysis of RF signals has demonstrated the potential to assess HIFU lesion formation in tissues [16,17]. In addition to these techniques, considerable effort has been directed toward developing alternative ultrasound-based methods for monitoring HIFU treatments [1820]. These include ultrasound elastography [2123], vibroacoustography [24], and local harmonic imaging (LHI) [25,26].

Ultrasound elastography produces elastograms that illustrate tissue responses to strain or stress. In a study by Arnal et al. [27], HIFU-exposed tissue shear wave elastograms were reported every three seconds in both in vitro and in vivo animal subjects. This article reported elasticity changes of up to 30% in liver tissue and 400% in muscle tissue. Bing et al. [28] used Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) imaging to monitor HIFU thermal ablation. They reported an up to 54% error in lesion area estimation. Thierman et al.[24] tried to monitor HIFU ablation by vibroacoustography. This technique requires the use of two ultrasound transducers to induce controlled vibrations within the targeted tissue. These vibrations are then measured with a hydrophone. Vibroacoustography is limited by factors such as the number of transducers required and their optimal spatial arrangement for generating and monitoring vibrations within the target region.

Local Harmonic Imaging (LHI) [29], another advanced technique, uses ultrasound to detect HIFU-induced thermal lesions by applying an acoustic radiation force that produces Localized Harmonic Oscillations (LHO). High frame rate ultrasonography is needed to measure changes in LHO amplitude. The experiments on HIFU exposed ex vivo porcine muscle showed an increase in Young’s moduli and a decrease in LHO amplitude.

Recent advancements in ultrasound-based HIFU lesion monitoring have demonstrated significant progress in improving treatment precision and safety. Liu et al. [30] validated the feasibility of Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) imaging for monitoring HIFU thermal damage, highlighting its ability to provide clearer lesion boundaries and higher damage contrast compared to conventional methods. Yang et al. [31] proposed multiple ultrasonic parametric imaging techniques, identifying horizontally normalized Shannon entropy (hNSE) imaging as the most effective for lesion recognition due to its superior contrast resolution and real-time monitoring capabilities. Additionally, Zhou et al. [32] introduced weighted ultrasound entropy (WUE) imaging, which showed a 39.2% to 53.4% improvement in contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) over B-mode imaging, demonstrating enhanced sensitivity and accuracy in HIFU ablation monitoring. These studies underscore the importance of developing advanced ultrasound techniques for HIFU therapy, as they address critical challenges in real-time lesion assessment and pave the way for more reliable clinical applications.

Twinkling Artifact (TA) is a color Doppler imaging artifact that was discovered accidentally by radiologists. TA appears as some pixels that rapidly change color from red to blue and from blue to red, creating a twinkling effect. The initial report on TA by Rahmouni et al. in 1996 [33] marked the discovery that this artifact does not originate from blood flow or movement [3339]. This led to multiple theories to explain the cause of TA, where coloration is not exclusively linked to flow or major movements. It has been observed adjacent to regions of pronounced vascular stenosis [40] or even within echo-free regions devoid of flow [35,41].

Numerous studies have posited that TA correlates with textural irregularities of the imaged medium under sonographic examination [3337,42]. Since its accidental discovery, a substantial body of research has been dedicated to deciphering the fundamental mechanisms responsible for the generation of TA [3739,43,44]. There are also efforts to use this artifact for diagnostic purposes; for instance, researchers have investigated the ability of TA to detect breast microcalcifications [45,46]. In several studies conducted on the twinkling artifact by Jamzad et. al.[42,4749], they worked on different factors of TA appearance in Doppler Images. They also worked on classifying TA in Doppler images acquired from sandpapers with seven levels of roughness. They successfully developed a 7-class classifier with 98.33% average accuracy. These studies showed that TA can effectively recognize the roughness of phantoms. However, this result is highly dependent on the ultrasound imaging instruments and cannot be easily extended to other instruments and projects. However, these studies investigated important statistical features in TA detection and classification.

Recent studies have demonstrated the potential of ultrasound-based techniques for detecting microbubbles and mapping cavitation activity in HIFU therapy. For instance, Khokhlova et al. [50] explored the use of the Twinkling Artifact (TA) to monitor cavitation microbubbles, while Tong Li et al. [51] proposed the ‘bubble Doppler’ technique for active cavitation mapping. These studies have shown promising results in enhancing our understanding of cavitation dynamics during HIFU treatments. However, a research gap remains in the application of TA for thermal lesion monitoring in HIFU therapy. Addressing this gap, our study proposes a novel application of TA to investigate its presence and characteristics in the lesion area, offering a new approach for real-time assessment of HIFU-induced thermal lesions. This work aims to complement existing methods by providing a cost-effective and accessible tool for improving treatment precision and safety.

This article investigates the presence of the Twinkling Artifact in the monitoring of HIFU-induced thermal lesions in ex vivo tissue. The core concept is based on the hypothesis that vibration induced by Acoustic Radiation Force (ARF) in coagulated tissue can cause TA. Since HIFU-induced thermal lesions demonstrate distinct acoustic and mechanical properties compared to native tissue, we expect corresponding differences in frequency-domain behavior at the lesion site. Consequently, our study aims to: (1) quantify frequency-domain disparities through observed Doppler-type shifts, and (2) evaluate Twinkling Artifact presence in Doppler reconstructions.

Our dataset in this research was composed of radio frequency signals backscattered from HIFU-exposed tissue. This data allowed us to investigate statistical and frequency features, including the twinkling artifact. After showing that ultrasound Doppler imaging could be beneficial in US-guided HIFU therapy, more investigation can take place with commercial Doppler imaging systems. The subsequent section describes the dataset employed and delineates the methodology for Doppler signal extraction as well as the construction of Doppler images.

2. Method and materials

2.1. Data

In this study, we apply our proposed methods to ultrasound RF echo data which was acquired previously at Toronto Metropolitan University (formerly Ryerson) [19]. Fresh ex-vivo porcine muscle tissues were utilized in the experiments. In the data acquisition phase, researchers used a confocal arrangement of a single-element HIFU transducer and a 192-element endocavity array probe imaging system. The HIFU transducer (Model 6699 A101; Imasonic, Voraysur1’Ognon, France) was spherically concave with a center frequency of 1 MHz, F-number of 0.8 and aperture diameter of 125 mm. For recording B-mode images and RF signals, the ultrasound imaging system (Sonix RP, Ultrasonix, Richmond, BC, Canada) and a convex array probe (EC9–5/10, Ultrasonix) with 192 elements with a center frequency of 6.5 MHz and bandwidth of 3 MHz were used. More details on experimental setup are available in the referenced paper. The schematic diagram of the experimental setup is depicted in Fig 1.

Fig 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setup for image-guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) [19].

Fig 1

In the experiments, RF signals and B-mode frames were obtained before, during, immediately after, and 10 minutes after HIFU exposure at various total acoustic powers of 90, 110 and 130 W. These power levels were selected because coagulative necrosis, a key indicator of thermal lesions, typically occurs at higher acoustic powers. This approach aligns with the aim of our project, which is to investigate the presence of the Twinkling Artifact (TA) in HIFU-induced lesions. The data has been segmented into three parts: Pre-HIFU, Dur-HIFU, and Post-HIFU. For Pre-HIFU, RF data acquisition targeted normal tissues. During the Dur-HIFU, RF data were collected while the HIFU transducer was momentarily switched off for 120 ms during exposure to avoid possible interference between HIFU and imaging transducer. Finally, Post-HIFU data were gathered 10 minutes following the HIFU sonification. Fig 2 illustrates the specific timing of HIFU exposure and the sequence of collected signals including Pre-HIFU, Dur-HIFU, and Post-HIFU. For more technical information about the transducer and experimental setup refer to the [19].

Fig 2. Timing sequence of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) exposure and radiofrequency echo data acquisition [19].

Fig 2

For each acoustic power setting, the dataset includes 81 frames, divided into 16 Pre-HIFU frames, 49 frames during and immediately after HIFU exposure (40 during HIFU and 9 immediately post-HIFU), and 16 frames acquired 10 minutes post-HIFU. Dimensional information of each frame of acquired data is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Dimensional Information of Each Frame of Acquired Data (Number of RF Lines, Samples per Line, and Dimensions in mm).

Samples per line (representing depth in mm) Lines
(representing width in mm)
Original 4680 (90.10 mm) 192 (64.00 mm)
Selected Region (contain tissue and lesion) 1000 (19.25 mm) 40(13.33 mm)

2.2. Methodology

In this study, we investigate the presence of the Twinkling Artifact (TA) in thermal lesions induced by High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU). The dataset used in this work consists of backscattered RF signals, as Doppler signals were not directly acquired. Therefore, the first step involved extracting Doppler signals from the RF data, followed by the construction of Doppler images. The proposed method is capable of processing signals containing all samples in each time series. However, to enable real-time reporting and effectively guide HIFU treatment, we opted to calculate frequency features from segmented time signals. We tested segment sizes ranging from 1 to 10 samples and ultimately selected 10-sample segments with a one-sample step size and nine-sample overlap. This approach balances computational efficiency with sufficient temporal resolution.

Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) was applied to these segmented signals to obtain the phase and amplitude of each segment. The maximum phase of each signal was extracted, and both the phase and corresponding amplitude were stored for each pixel. To extract frequency from the phases, we first removed noise effects by applying an amplitude threshold, set at one-tenth of the maximum amplitude. This threshold ratio was determined through iterative testing to optimize noise reduction while preserving meaningful signal components. Frequencies were then calculated by subtracting the phase of each pixel in two consecutive records. These frequencies represent the Doppler shift frequency, and by visualizing the matrices of these extracted frequencies, we generated the Doppler images. In the following sections, we provide a detailed explanation of the methodology used in this study, including the theoretical foundations and practical implementation of the proposed approach.

2.2.1. Doppler signals.

In this manuscript, we report a real-time method that can be integrated with existing ultrasound devices in medical centers. We investigated the potential of Doppler imaging for monitoring lesions formed by High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) ablation. To tailor this approach, we developed a method for extracting the Doppler shift from backscattered radiofrequency (RF) signals. This method is based on the velocity estimation methodologies described in Foundations of Biomedical Ultrasound by Cobbold [52] (Section 10.5 physical principles of pulsed systems). According to the following descriptions and analysis provided, the main frequencies of sampled signals from RF signals qualify as Doppler shift frequencies. First, the Doppler frequency shift can be expressed as follows (1):

fD=2vcof0cosθ (1)

In this equation(1), fD stands for the Doppler shift frequency, f0 demonstrates the transmitted frequency, c0 is the wave velocity in the medium, θ is the angle between the direction of wave propagation and the direction of motion and v is the velocity of the target. This formula is derived by subtracting the transmitted signal frequency from the received signal frequency (2.a):

fD=fRfT=f0[2vcv] (2.a)

In this equation (2.a) fT is the transmitted frequency and fR is the received frequency from a moving scatterer that is calculated from this equation (2.b):

fR=f0[c+vcv, (2.b)

In Biomedical Ultrasound, Cobbold derives an important equation for estimating the velocity in a pulsed system from a single scatterer with constant velocity. This approach can provide an alternative method for calculating the Doppler frequency shift. If we denote the velocity of the scatterer as v and the pulse repetition interval as tPRI, the displacement along the beam axis during successive transmissions is calculated as Δz=(v cosθ)tPRI. Consequently, the corresponding change in the delay between sequentially received signals is Δτ=2Δzc0,which can be further reformulated as (3.a):

Δτ=2(v cosθ)tPRIc0 (3.a)

The velocity of the scatterer can be calculated by the following equation (3.b):

v=c0Δτ2 tPRIcosθ (3.b)

This equation is derived from equation (3.a) by rearranging the terms to solve for v. RF signals in this context are called fast-time signals. By sampling from a specific depth in a sequence of received RF lines, we obtain a signal known as a slow-time signal. The central frequency of the slow-time signal is approximated by 2πfΔϕtPRI, where Δϕ is the phase shift of the slow-time signal. However, the phase shifts of the slow-time and fast-time signals are identical, so that Δϕ=2πfcΔτ, where fc is the center frequency of the transmitted waveform. Consequently, the center frequency of the pulse wave, or slow-time signal, can be re-expressed as f=fcΔτtPRI. After substituting Δτ as given by Eq.3.a, the important equation can be derived as follows:

f=2vcosθc0fc (4)

Equation 4 matches the frequency shift formula found in Equation 1. Thus, we can use the slow-time signal’s frequency as the RF signal’s frequency shift. From the RF data, we extract the frequency characteristics of the slow-time signal for each pixel in the sample tissue. Doppler images are then a visual representation of these frequency characteristics. (You can refer to the ‘Fundamentals of Biomedical Ultrasound’ by Cobbold [52] for further information about deriving equations).

2.2.2. Doppler images.

In this phase, the Doppler signal was calculated for all samples. During the 10-second HIFU treatment, 40 frames were captured at 250 millisecond intervals. To obtain the Doppler images, we applied the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) to slow-time signals. We had slow time signals with 40 samples during HIFU exposure. First, frequency features were extracted from non-segmented signals, so we only had one picture during HIFU exposure. To improve the temporal visualization, every 10 samples of the slow-time signal were considered as a segment of the slow-time signal. By sliding windows across slow-time signal with 1 sample step, we extracted 30 windows from HIFU exposure. After extracting the amplitude and frequency components from every 10-sample segment of the slow-time signals, the noise effects in the amplitude are omitted, and the maximum frequency is designated as the frequency shift for that pixel.

3. Result

3.1. Slow-time signals

In this paper, the RF signals are called fast-time signals due to their high frequency. Also, the slow-time signals are sampled signals from a specific depth in a sequence of RF lines. The time interval of slow-time signals depends on signal acquisition. In this case, the rate is 40 signals in 10 seconds during HIFU exposure. The slow-time signals for all frames in different powers were extracted. The RF (fast-time) and slow-time signals from the 110th RF line (which includes the lesion formation data) are shown in Fig 3. The RF line number 110 is selected because we already know from B-mode images that the lesion is formed in the regions between 90–130 and depth between sample 3000–4500.

Fig 3. This image illustrates the 110th RF line in 81 records of 90W HIFU exposure.

Fig 3

Each vertical line represents a selected depth of RF signals (sample 3400 to 4100) or a fast-time signal, while each horizontal line represents a slow-time signal. (The colorbar unit is the amplitude of the received RF signal).

It can be seen that with HIFU exposure, there are changes in the amplitude of signals. In the next stage, we applied FFT to each slow-time signal and extracted the maximum frequency and amplitude of each sample in all RF lines in the selected depth; for instance, the 110th RF line’s Maximum amplitude, frequency and filtered maximum frequency are illustrated in Fig 4.

Fig 4. a) Maximum amplitude, b) frequency, and c) filtered maximum frequency of slow-time signals from the 110th RF line, samples 3400 to 4100, under 90W HIFU exposure.

Fig 4

In the Methodology section, we showed that the main frequency of slow-time signals can be represented as Doppler frequency shifts. Therefore, we applied FFT to extract the maximum frequency and amplitude of each slow-time signal. Although there are closely spaced frequencies at each depth, we can disregard frequencies with low amplitudes by applying a threshold. In Fig 4c, the maximum frequencies of considerable amplitudes of slow-time signals are shown.

To construct real-time Doppler images from our data, we consider 10-length windows from slow-time signals, advancing one step forward across time (or frame numbers). Then, the process of extracting the maximum frequency, which is explained here for the 110th RF line, was applied to selected region signals. First, all slow-time signals were saved in tensors. Then, FFT was applied to each 10-sample window, and the considerable maximum frequencies were saved. Finally, Doppler images were constructed for every 10 frames. In the next section, the constructed images are shown.

3.2. Doppler images

To achieve real-time lesion monitoring, Doppler images were constructed by windowing the slow-time signal. A selection of these images, which illustrate lesion formation under 90W HIFU exposure, are shown in Fig 5.

Fig 5. Constructed Doppler images: (a), (b), and (c) during HIFU exposure, and (d) long after HIFU, corresponding to frames 13, 26, 39, and 67, respectively.

Fig 5

Colorbar indicates frequency shift (Hz).

In Fig 5, we illustrate some frames of the constructed images that show HIFU ablation step by step in the sample. The 13th, 26th, and 39th frames correspond to when HIFU was active, and the 67th frame is from 10 minutes after turning off HIFU. Therefore, the images constructed from slow-time signals enable the visual monitoring of lesion formation.

To compare the lesion size in the constructed images with the measured lesion size from photographs provided in the dataset, we created Table 2 with the size data available for lesions under HIFU exposure at acoustic powers of 90, 110, and 130 W. In [19], researchers cut the tissue and took photographs. They included a ruler in their photographs to serve as a reference for length measurement. For instance, coagulated tissue from 110W HIFU exposure and its dimensions are illustrated in Fig 6.

Table 2. Comparison of lesion depth and width induced by HIFU exposure at 90, 110, and 130 W, showing actual values (from photographs), measured means (from constructed images), standard deviations (SD), percentage errors, 95% confidence intervals (CI), and p-values.

Power Parameter Actual Value Mean (Measured) SD Percentage Error 95% CI p-value
130 W Depth (mm) 14.4 14.45 0.13 0.35% 14.45 ± 0.07 0.14
Width (mm) 12 12.01 0.19 0.08% 12.01 ± 0.10 0.84
110 W Depth (mm) 14.28 14.46 0.14 1.26% 14.46 ± 0.07 0.02
Width (mm) 8.9 8.64 0.2 2.92% 8.64 ± 0.11 0.01
90 W Depth (mm) 11.43 12 0.22 4.99% 12.00 ± 0.12 < 0.001
Width (mm) 7 7 0.2 0% 7.00 ± 0.11 1

Fig 6. Dimensions of the lesion in the captured photograph of tissue exposed to 110 W HIFU.

Fig 6

In the original photographs, the samples were cut into two pieces, resulting in two close but not identical measurements for the dimensions of the ablated tissue. Due to the lack of access to the exact size of the lesion in the experimental study, and since we only have photographs of the cut tissue, we measured the depth and width in both right and left cuts and then used the average of these measurements. It can be seen that the lesion’s width and depth monitored by the constructed images are in good match with the original size, with less than a 5% difference. This indicates that the constructed images provide a reliable representation of the actual lesion dimensions. Standard deviation (SD), confidence intervals (CI), and p-values were also calculated from 16 frames of constructed images taken after HIFU treatment. The low SD values, narrow 95% CI, and p-values show a strong agreement between the constructed images and the actual data. Overall, the method provides a reliable representation of lesion dimensions. The constructed images and photographs of ablated tissue with HIFU exposure at 90, 110, and 130 W are shown in Fig 7.

Fig 7. (a), (b), and (c) are constructed images (Hz) and photographs of lesions with HIFU exposure at 130, 110, and 90 W, respectively.

Fig 7

4. Discussion

The potential of Doppler ultrasound imaging for monitoring HIFU-induced thermal lesions was examined in this study. As an alternative to MRI and other ultrasound-based techniques, we developed a real-time, cost-effective method that uses the Twinkling Artifact (TA) to detect and visualize lesions. Our approach shows benefits such as lower implementation complexity, transferability, and ease of integration into existing clinical systems. By focusing on frequency shifts, this method offers a novel tool for real-time thermal lesion monitoring. The results emphasize the viability of using TA as a marker for thermal lesions, opening the door for additional research and clinical translation.

In this work, we present a new method for using Doppler imaging to monitor HIFU-induced thermal lesions. Although the Twinkling Artifact (TA) for cavitation detection in HIFU therapy has been studied in the past by Khokhlova et al. [50] and Tong Li et al. [51], the use of TA for thermal lesion monitoring is still largely unexplored. Our work bridges this gap by examining the presence and characteristics of TA in the lesion area, offering a new tool for real-time assessment of HIFU-induced thermal damage. This is the first attempt to use TA for lesion monitoring, providing a practical and affordable alternative to current methods. By focusing on thermal lesions, our method complements existing approaches and improves the accuracy and safety of HIFU therapy.

The developed method offers significant advantages over MRI and other ultrasound-based techniques in terms of implementation complexity and cost. Unlike MRI, which requires expensive equipment and specialized facilities, our approach uses Doppler imaging systems that are widely available in clinical settings. This makes it a more accessible and cost-effective solution for real-time HIFU lesion monitoring. Additionally, compared to advanced ultrasound-based methods like Local Harmonic Imaging, Vibro-acoustography, and shear modulus imaging, our method eliminates the need for complex setups, such as high-frame-rate systems or additional transducers for tissue excitation. For instance, Arnal et al. [27] demonstrated that constructing shear wave images requires a high-frame-rate system (17,000 frames per second), which is both costly and sensitive to physiological motions. In contrast, our method simplifies the monitoring process by relying solely on Doppler imaging, making it more practical for clinical use.

Ultrasound elastography also faces several limitations in guiding HIFU therapy. It relies on assumptions of linear elasticity, symmetrical tissue response, and homogeneous tissue properties, which are often challenged by the dynamic changes in tissue elasticity during HIFU treatment. Furthermore, in vivo applications are complicated by physiological movements and backscattered waves from bones, leading to inaccuracies in elastograms. Vibro-acoustography [24] and Local Harmonic Imaging [29] require additional transducers to generate acoustic radiation force and stimulate tissue oscillations, adding complexity to the treatment setup. In contrast, our proposed method does not require tissue excitation or high-frame-rate imaging systems. It utilizes standard Doppler imaging systems, which are already integrated into commercial ultrasound devices, making it easier to implement in clinical practice.

This method has two main limitations: the lack of in vivo validation and the challenges posed by physiological movements. While the ex vivo results are promising, they do not account for the complexities of living tissues, such as variations in tissue properties and patient movement. It is important to emphasize that the method is best suited for stationary tissues and should avoid areas with significant physiological movement, such as the heart and lungs. These limitations highlight the need for future in vivo trials to validate the method under realistic conditions and ensure its reliability in clinical settings.

To address these limitations and refine the method, future studies should focus on several key areas. First, using commercially available Doppler imaging systems, researchers can explore additional frequency features from RF signals to improve accuracy and reliability. Second, extracting the exact relationship between TA intensity, ultrasound frequency, and signal amplitude is essential for optimizing the method for clinical use. Factors influencing TA, such as acoustic radiation force (ARF), tissue depth, and tissue characteristics, should also be investigated. Additionally, future experimental setups should enable real-time monitoring of lesion area, boundaries, width, and depth, addressing the current reliance on post-treatment analysis. Merging this method with ultrasound-based thermometry, as demonstrated in Malekzadeh et al. [53] by the authors of this paper, could further enhance monitoring capabilities by combining thermal and structural information. Additionally, future studies exploring the influencing factors on the twinkling artifact could be valuable in validating this method for HIFU thermal therapy. Finally, the simultaneous use of MRI and Doppler ultrasound in future studies would enable a comprehensive quantitative error analysis. MRI can provide high-accuracy lesion dimensions and boundaries, making it an ideal dataset for validating ultrasound-based methods in lesion monitoring. This study represents the first step toward developing a reliable, clinically viable tool for HIFU lesion monitoring.

5. Conclusion

In this study, we investigated an ultrasound Doppler imaging approach for monitoring HIFU thermal therapy. This ultrasound-based method can be effective in expanding and developing the use of HIFU in therapeutic procedures. The findings from our study indicated that the twinkling artifact occurs significantly in Doppler ultrasound images of thermal lesions and that it can detect and monitor HIFU-induced lesions. Our results showed that Doppler imaging can monitor the formation of lesions during HIFU treatment and has a low error (or high sensitivity) in showing and measuring the dimensions of the lesions.

The results of this study showed that HIFU-induced lesions can be monitored during formation. Additionally, the lesions’ size can be precisely measured by ultrasound Doppler imaging. These two factors can facilitate the HIFU therapy procedure and improve cancer treatment.

Compared to other ultrasound-based methods, the twinkling artifact in Doppler imaging offers simplicity, lower cost, and more precise localization of the thermal ablation within the tissues. These advantages of simplicity, lower cost, and efficacy make this method, which can suitable for integration into current ultrasonography systems, facilitating HIFU therapy’s adoption and utilization in clinical procedures.

Our suggestions for future research in this field include validating this method in in vivo subjects, and applying machine learning-based image segmentation to estimate the volume of coagulated tissue. These recommendations would consider dynamic tissue properties and blood flow and develop an automatic approach for real-time HIFU exposure monitoring that could lead to higher precision and safety in ultrasound-guided thermal therapy.

Data Availability

All the radio frequency (rf) data files used in this study, along with the two MATLAB codes developed for reading them, are publicly available in a Zenodo repository at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15188602.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Elhelf IAS, Albahar H, Shah U, Oto A, Cressman E, Almekkawy M. High intensity focused ultrasound: The fundamentals, clinical applications and research trends. Diagn Interv Imaging. 2018;99(6):349–59. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2018.03.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hou GY, Luo J, Marquet F, Maleke C, Vappou J, Konofagou EE. Performance assessment of HIFU lesion detection by harmonic motion imaging for focused ultrasound (HMIFU): a 3-D finite-element-based framework with experimental validation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011;37(12):2013–27. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2011.09.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.de Senneville BD, Moonen C, Ries M. MRI-Guided HIFU Methods for the Ablation of Liver and Renal Cancers. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2016;880:43–63. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-22536-4_3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chan M, Dennis K, Huang Y, Mougenot C, Chow E, DeAngelis C, et al. Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity-Focused Ultrasound for Palliation of Painful Skeletal Metastases: A Pilot Study. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017;16(5):570–6. doi: 10.1177/1533034616658576 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Khokhlova TD, Canney MS, Lee D, Marro KI, Crum LA, Khokhlova VA, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of boiling induced by high intensity focused ultrasound. J Acoust Soc Am. 2009;125(4):2420–31. doi: 10.1121/1.3081393 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hynynen K. MRIgHIFU: a tool for image-guided therapeutics. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;34(3):482–93. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22649 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Vaezy S, Andrew M, Kaczkowski P, Crum L. Image-Guided Acoustic Therapy. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2001;3(1):375–90. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.3.1.375 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Vaezy S, Shi X, Martin RW, Chi E, Nelson PI, Bailey MR, et al. Real-time visualization of high-intensity focused ultrasound treatment using ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001;27(1):33–42. doi: 10.1016/s0301-5629(00)00279-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Bamber JC, Hill CR. Ultrasonic attenuation and propagation speed in mammalian tissues as a function of temperature. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1979;5(2):149–57. doi: 10.1016/0301-5629(79)90083-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bloch SH, Bailey MR, Crum LA, Kaczkowski PJ, Mourad PD, Keilman GW. Measurements of sound speed in excised tissue over temperatures expected under high intensity focused ultrasound conditions. Journal Title Abbreviation Needed. 2023:10. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Zhong H, Wan M-X, Jiang Y-F, Wang S-P. Monitoring imaging of lesions induced by high intensity focused ultrasound based on differential ultrasonic attenuation and integrated backscatter estimation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007;33(1):82–94. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2006.07.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Damianou CA, Sanghvi NT, Fry FJ, Maass-Moreno R. Dependence of ultrasonic attenuation and absorption in dog soft tissues on temperature and thermal dose. J Acoust Soc Am. 1997;102(1):628–34. doi: 10.1121/1.419737 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rangraz P, Behnam H, Bidari PS, Shakhssalim N, Tavakkoli J. Dynamic changes in the acousto-mechanical and statistical parameters of tissue during high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) treatment. Biomed Eng Appl Basis Commun. 2014;26(01):1450009. doi: 10.4015/s1016237214500094 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Miller NR, Bamber JC, Meaney PM. Fundamental limitations of noninvasive temperature imaging by means of ultrasound echo strain estimation. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2002;28(10):1319–33. doi: 10.1016/s0301-5629(02)00608-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rangraz P, Behnam H, Tavakkoli J. Nakagami imaging for detecting thermal lesions induced by high-intensity focused ultrasound in tissue. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2013;228(1):19–26. doi: 10.1177/0954411913511777 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Imani F, Wu MZ, Lasso A, Burdette EC, Daoud M, Fitchinger G, et al. Monitoring of tissue ablation using time series of ultrasound RF data. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv. 2011;14:379–86. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-23623-5_48 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Mobasheri S, Behnam H, Rangraz P, Tavakkoli J. Radio Frequency Ultrasound Time Series Signal Analysis to Ev.: Journal of Medical Signals & Sensors. Accessed: Jun. 03, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://journals.lww.com/jmss/fulltext/2016/06020/Radio_Frequency_Ultrasound_Time_Series_Signal.4.aspx [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Behnam H, Monfared M, Rangraz P, Tavakkoli J. High-intensity focused ultrasound thermal lesion detection using entropy imaging of ultrasound radio frequency signal time series. J Med Ultrasound. 2018;26(1):24. doi: 10.4103/jmu.jmu_3_17 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rangraz P, Behnam H, Sobhebidari P, Tavakkoli J. Real-Time Monitoring of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Thermal Therapy Using the Manifold Learning Method. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2014;40(12):2841–50. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.07.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.A Feed-forward Neural Network Algorithm to Detect Thermal Le.: Journal of Medical Signals & Sensors. Accessed: Jun. 03, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://journals.lww.com/jmss/fulltext/2012/02040/a_feed_forward_neural_network_algorithm_to_detect.2.aspx [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Souchon R, Rouvière O, Gelet A, Detti V, Srinivasan S, Ophir J, et al. Visualisation of HIFU lesions using elastography of the human prostate in vivo: preliminary results. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29(7):1007–15. doi: 10.1016/s0301-5629(03)00065-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Liu C. Real-time diagnosis of hifu lesion formation by ultrasound elastography. Nanyang Technological University. 10.32657/10356/75097 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Rangraz P, Behnam H, Tavakkoli J. Nakagami imaging for detecting thermal lesions induced by high-intensity focused ultrasound in tissue. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2014;228(1):19–26. doi: 10.1177/0954411913511777 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Thierman JS. Ultrasound stimulated acoustic emission for monitoring thermal surgery. 2001, Accessed: Jun. 03, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/8880 [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Maleke C, Konofagou EE. Harmonic motion imaging for focused ultrasound (HMIFU): a fully integrated technique for sonication and monitoring of thermal ablation in tissues. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(6):1773–93. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/53/6/018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Han Y, Wang S, Payen T, Konofagou E. Fast lesion mapping during HIFU treatment using harmonic motion imaging guided focused ultrasound (HMIgFUS) in vitro and in vivo. Phys Med Biol. 2017;62(8):3111–23. doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/aa6024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Arnal B, Pernot M, Tanter M. Monitoring of thermal therapy based on shear modulus changes: II. Shear wave imaging of thermal lesions. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2011;58(8):1603–11. doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2011.1987 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bing KF, Rouze NC, Palmeri ML, Rotemberg VM, Nightingale KR. Combined ultrasonic thermal ablation with interleaved ARFI image monitoring using a single diagnostic curvilinear array: a feasibility study. Ultrason Imaging. 2011;33(4):217–32. doi: 10.1177/016173461103300402 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Gandhi N. High Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) Thermal Lesion Detection Using Local Harmonic Imaging. Sep. 2023. doi: 10.32920/24192348.V1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Liu Y, Shi X, Ran Y, Zhou X. Monitoring HIFU thermal damage based on differential acoustic radiation force pulse imaging. 2024 IEEE Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control Jt Symp. Sep 2024;1–4. doi: 10.1109/UFFC-JS60046.2024.10793503 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Yang G, Liu J, Yang B, Guo J, Wu C, Zhang B, et al. Multiple ultrasonic parametric imaging for the detection and monitoring of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation. Ultrasonics. 2024;139:107274. doi: 10.1016/j.ultras.2024.107274 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhou Y, Yang K, Xu J, Cai D, Zhou X. HIFU ablation monitoring with weighted ultrasound entropy imaging. 2024 IEEE Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control Jt Symp. Sep. 2024;1–4. doi: 10.1109/uffc-js60046.2024.10793626 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Rahmouni A, Bargoin R, Herment A, Bargoin N, Vasile N. Color Doppler twinkling artifact in hyperechoic regions. Radiology. 1996;199(1):269–71. doi: 10.1148/radiology.199.1.8633158 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Gao J, Hentel K, Rubin JM. Correlation between twinkling artifact and color Doppler carrier frequency: preliminary observations in renal calculi. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2012;38(9):1534–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2012.04.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Trillaud H, Pariente JL, Rabie A, Grenier N. Detection of encrusted indwelling ureteral stents using a twinkling artifact revealed on color Doppler sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(6):1446–8. doi: 10.2214/ajr.176.6.1761446 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Oktar SÖ, Yücel C, Erbaş G, Özdemir H. Use of twinkling artifact in sonographic detection of intestinal pneumatosis. Abdom Imaging. 2005;31(3):293–6. doi: 10.1007/s00261-005-0021-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Behnam H, Hajjam A, Rakhshan H. Modeling Twinkling Artifact in Sonography. 2010 4th Int Conf Bioinforma Biomed Eng iCBBE. 2010;2010. doi: 10.1109/icbbe.2010.5515795 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Kamaya A, Tuthill T, M. Rubin J. Twinkling Artifact on Color Doppler Sonography: Dependence on Machine Parameters and Underlying Cause. Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180(1):215–22. doi: 10.2214/ajr.180.1.1800215 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Ozkur A, Dikensoy E, Kervancioglu S, Kervancioglu R, İnalöz S, Bayram M. Color Doppler twinkling artifact in intrauterine fetal demise. J Clin Ultrasound. 2007;36(3):153–6. doi: 10.1002/jcu.20381 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Middleton WD, Erickson S, Melson GL. Perivascular color artifact: pathologic significance and appearance on color Doppler US images. Radiology. 1989;171(3):647–52. doi: 10.1148/radiology.171.3.2655000 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Mitchell DG, Burns P, Needleman L. Color Doppler artifact in anechoic regions. J Ultrasound Med. 1990;9(5):255–60. doi: 10.7863/jum.1990.9.5.255 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Jamzad A, Setarehdan SK. A Novel Approach for Quantification and Analysis of the Color Doppler Twinkling Artifact With Application in Noninvasive Surface Roughness Characterization. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(4):597–610. doi: 10.7863/ultra.33.4.597 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Leonov DV, Kulberg NS, Gromov AI, Morozov SP, Kim SY. Causes of Ultrasound Doppler Twinkling Artifact. Acoust Phys. Jan. 2018;64(1):105–14. doi: 10.1134/S1063771018010128/METRICS [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Bacha R, Gilani SA, Manzoor I. Relation of Color Doppler Twinkling Artifact and Scale or Pulse Repetition Frequency. J Med Ultrasound. 2019;27(1):13–8. doi: 10.4103/JMU.JMU_129_18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Kang J, Han K, Song I, Kim K-S, Jang WS, Kim MJ, et al. Real-Time Ultrasound Detection of Breast Microcalcifications Using Multifocus Twinkling Artifact Imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2022;41(5):1300–8. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2021.3136901 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Relea A, Alonso JA, González M, Zornoza C, Bahamonde S, Viñuela BE, et al. Usefulness of the twinkling artifact on Doppler ultrasound for the detection of breast microcalcifications. Radiología (English Edition). 2018;60(5):413–23. doi: 10.1016/j.rxeng.2018.07.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Jamzad A, Setarehdan SK. Simulation of the twinkling artifact in color flow Doppler sonography: A phase noise hypothesis validation. 2011 IEEE Int Conf Signal Image Process Appl ICSIPA. 2011:22–27. doi: 10.1109/icsipa.2011.6144130 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Jamzad A, Setarehdan SK. Noninvasive Prediction of Renal Stone Surface Irregularities by Numerical Analysis of the Color Doppler Twinkling Artifact: An Ex Vivo Study. J Ultrasound Med. 2018;37(5):1211–24. doi: 10.1002/jum.14465 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Akbarifar F, Jamzad A, Setarehdan SK. Time series analysis of the Twinkling Artifact in color Doppler sonography for surface roughness differentiation: An in vitro feasibility study. 2013 20th Iran Conf Biomed Eng ICBME. 2013:76–80. doi: 10.1109/icbme.2013.6782196 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Khokhlova T, Li T, Sapozhnikov O, Hwang JH. The use of twinkling artifact of Doppler imaging to monitor cavitation in tissue during high intensity focused ultrasound therapy. Proc Meet Acoust. 2013;19. doi: 10.1121/1.4800366/855749 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Li T, Khokhlova TD, Sapozhnikov OA, O’Donnell M, Hwang JH. A new active cavitation mapping technique for pulsed HIFU applications--bubble Doppler. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2014;61(10):1698–708. doi: 10.1109/TUFFC.2014.006502 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Cobbold RSC. Introduction. Found. Biomed. Ultrasound. 2006:1–21. Accessed: Jun. 05, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/foundations-of-biomedical-ultrasound-9780195168310 [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Malekzadeh KB, Behnam H, Tavakkoli JJ. Noninvasive Monitoring of Tissue Temperature Changes Induced by Focused Ultrasound Exposure using Sparse Expression of Ultrasonic Radio Frequency Echo Signals. J Med Signals Sens. 2024;14:8. doi: 10.4103/jmss.jmss_23_23 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Arka Bhowmik

3 Nov 2024

Dear Dr. Behnam,

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 18 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Arka Bhowmik, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Check the last line of the abstract to ensure it is the same.  The reason for this check is to ensure that the AEs and Reviewers are sent correct information to allow them to make a good decision on whether they can manage/review the manuscript.  Only send back for a change if the abstract on EM and in the manuscript are VASTLY different.

3. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.  

Before we proceed with your manuscript, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board, etc.). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. You also have the option of uploading the data as Supporting Information files, but we would recommend depositing data directly to a data repository if possible.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

Reviewer #1: The paper titled "Monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) Thermal Therapy by Ultrasound Doppler Imaging Using Twinkling Artifact" explores an approach for monitoring HIFU-induced thermal lesions in tissue by leveraging the twinkling artifact (TA) in Doppler ultrasound. The study utilizes real-time Doppler imaging to detect frequency shifts caused by HIFU exposure in ex-vivo porcine tissue, creating visual markers of lesion formation. The findings indicate that TA in Doppler images can accurately monitor lesion dimensions during HIFU ablation with less than 10% error, presenting this method as a potentially effective alternative to MRI-guided HIFU monitoring. The approach's simplicity, cost-efficiency, and compatibility with existing ultrasound systems are highlighted as significant advantages over MRI and other ultrasound methods. There are several major concerns regarding this study, along with suggestions that could improve the quality of the paper.

Major Concerns and Suggestions:

1. The authors frequently use the term “novel” throughout the manuscript. However, there are already studies available that explore the use of the twinkling artifact in Doppler imaging to monitor HIFU, some of which are mentioned below. The authors should clearly elaborate on the novelty of their work compared to previous studies and ensure that all relevant prior research is cited. Additionally, I suggest that they avoid using the word “novel” and remove it from all sections of the manuscript.

https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4800366

DOI: 10.1109/TUFFC.2014.006502

2. As mentioned above as well, the introduction should focus on the work that has already been done in this field. All the available references in this field, including the most recent ones from 2024 on HIFU and HIFU monitoring, should be carefully added.

3. The methodology section requires further detail to improve reproducibility. Key aspects, such as the specific Doppler signal processing steps, frequency thresholds, and image construction parameters, need more explicit descriptions.

4. The manuscript omits important machine-specific parameters, such as Doppler frequency and pulse repetition settings, which could impact reproducibility across different systems.

5. While the ex-vivo results are promising, there is no in-vivo validation. Including a discussion on the limitations of ex-vivo results and plans for future in-vivo trials is necessary to account for physiological variations.

6. While the paper briefly compares Doppler TA with MRI, a more comprehensive analysis contrasting the proposed method with existing ultrasound-based techniques (e.g., elastography, local harmonic imaging) would strengthen the discussion. This could help emphasize its unique advantages or address comparable limitations.

7. The paper overlooks some technical challenges, such as variability in TA intensity across different depths and tissue types, which could impact clinical implementation. Including a discussion on how these factors might influence TA consistency and proposing solutions would enhance the study’s practicality.

8. Beyond lesion size, additional quantitative assessments, such as boundary detection accuracy and frequency shift consistency, would help validate the method's precision. A quantitative error analysis of lesion boundary accuracy and TA intensity over time would further support the method's effectiveness and reliability.

9. Potential Doppler image artifacts, such as signal noise or low-intensity TA regions, are not addressed, which may impact lesion boundary detection.

10. The rationale behind selecting specific power levels (90W, 110W, 130W) is not detailed, potentially affecting reproducibility.

11. The study does not discuss how varying thermal doses impact TA visibility, potentially influencing lesion monitoring under different HIFU settings. The title of the paper explicitly mentions HIFU thermal therapy, implying that the thermal factor of HIFU would be the dominant factor in the therapy rather than the mechanical factor. However, there is no mention of the temperature increase amount due to each of the powers considered.

12. Potential clinical implementation challenges, such as patient movement and variability in tissue properties, are not discussed.

13. The study lacks a sensitivity analysis of Doppler TA detection, which would clarify the Doppler method’s performance across different lesion sizes and depths.

14. In the end, while the idea of monitoring HIFU by using the twinkling artifact of ultrasound Doppler imaging is a quite interesting topic, the presentation of results is not sufficiently scientific, leading to issues with result interpretation. I suggest improving the discussion section with a more quantitative analysis of the obtained results. Additionally, mentioning the drawbacks of this work and suggesting possible study directions to address these technical issues would be beneficial as well.

Reviewer #2: Review Comments for Manuscript PONE-D-24-41591:

Monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Thermal Therapy by Ultrasound Doppler Imaging Using Twinkling Artifact

General Assessment:

This manuscript aims to introduce a novel approach for monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU) thermal therapy using Doppler ultrasound imaging to detect twinkling artifacts (TAs) for lesion monitoring. The research is timely, given the increasing focus on non-invasive therapeutic modalities, and offers an interesting alternative to Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) for HIFU lesion monitoring. However, several critical issues limit its suitability for publication in its current form. The manuscript would benefit from significant revisions to improve the clarity, rigor, and reproducibility of the presented method.

Major Comments:

Methodology and Experimental Design:

The manuscript lacks sufficient methodological details, particularly regarding the Doppler signal processing steps. Essential steps such as noise reduction techniques and parameter settings for Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) are vaguely described, which may hinder reproducibility.

The rationale for choosing specific parameters, such as sampling frequency and Doppler imaging intervals, is not clearly justified. Clarification is essential for verifying the robustness of the technique under different settings.

The study's experimental design relies on ex-vivo porcine tissue samples, which limit its clinical relevance. Extending the work to in-vivo studies is essential to validate the method for real-time HIFU lesion monitoring in a clinical context.

Data Analysis and Interpretation:

The authors report a less than 10% error in depth and width measurements for coagulated tissue dimensions; however, statistical validation is missing. Including statistical metrics, such as confidence intervals or p-values, would strengthen the claim.

The frequency analysis and Doppler image construction methods are introduced but not supported with quantitative analyses of accuracy or precision compared to established methods.

The constructed Doppler images (Figure 5) require more clarity, especially regarding the artifacts that are intended to represent TAs. The images should be annotated and analyzed with better-defined metrics.

Technical Limitations and Applicability:

Despite discussing the limitations of existing MRI and ultrasound-based methods, the manuscript does not provide a comprehensive comparison of how the proposed Doppler imaging approach surpasses or falls short of these alternatives. Explicit benchmarks or performance comparisons would be beneficial.

The proposed method’s sensitivity and specificity in detecting TAs related to HIFU lesions are not adequately evaluated, limiting the manuscript's practical value in guiding clinical applications.

Lack of Innovation and Literature Gap:

Although the use of Doppler imaging to monitor HIFU treatment is potentially valuable, the manuscript does not sufficiently differentiate itself from prior works on TAs in sonography. The novelty of the approach is undermined by a lack of unique insights or innovative techniques. A more thorough literature review that establishes a genuine gap is necessary.

Ethics and Data Availability:

There is no explicit ethical consideration or discussion on data accessibility. Given that the study could have implications for human subjects in future clinical applications, ethical considerations need to be addressed. Additionally, data availability should be transparent to ensure reproducibility.

Minor Comments:

The manuscript has several typographical and grammatical errors, which detract from the readability and professional presentation. A thorough proofreading is recommended.

Figures, particularly 5 and 6, lack sufficient annotations, which makes interpreting the results challenging. Including color-coded legends and scale bars would improve clarity.

The reference section includes several incomplete citations, with missing links to data sources and studies.

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Review.pdf

pone.0324801.s001.pdf (88.9KB, pdf)
PLoS One. 2025 Jul 2;20(7):e0324801. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324801.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


9 Feb 2025

All raised points are addressed in the response to reviewers file.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0324801.s004.docx (23.7KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Kisoo Kim

21 Feb 2025

Dear Dr. Behnam,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 07 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Kisoo Kim, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Authors,

As Your manuscript, titled below, has been evaluated: "Monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Thermal Therapy by Ultrasound Doppler Imaging Using Twinkling Artifact"

Some typographical errors and issues with English grammar have been identified. I kindly ask you to review and proofread the manuscript to improve its grammar and overall readability.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions??>

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->?>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

Reviewer #1: I thank the authors for addressing the comments. Most of the concerns have been answered sufficiently, but some issues remain regarding the responses. Additionally, some technical refinements are necessary in the manuscript.

Unaddressed or Incompletely Addressed Points

1. Justification for Parameter Selection: The justification for choosing specific FFT parameters, noise thresholds, and segmentation window sizes is not detailed. The explanation of Doppler signal extraction and processing could be expanded. Specifically, the choice of a 10-sample window and the noise thresholding method require additional justification. Were these parameters optimized through testing or based on prior literature?

2. Quantitative Comparison of Doppler TA to Other Modalities: While the authors compared Doppler TA to MRI and ultrasound elastography, a quantitative comparison (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) is lacking. The discussion on alternative imaging modalities (MRI, elastography, etc.) is useful, but quantitative performance comparisons (e.g., sensitivity/specificity, resolution) would strengthen the argument for Doppler TA’s clinical relevance.

3. Figure Modifications: Some figures (e.g., Figures 5 and 6) were updated based on reviewer comments but still need modification. The color bar explanation should not be only in the caption. The figure should be self-explanatory, allowing readers to grasp all relevant information at a glance. The color bar lacks a title indicating what the colors represent. Although mentioned in the caption, the figure itself should clearly display this information. Please add a title to the color bar in each of the figures.

4. Statistical Validation Details: Although standard deviation (SD) and confidence intervals were added, a more detailed explanation of the statistical methods used for lesion measurement validation is missing. Further details on how SD and confidence intervals were calculated would improve transparency. Additionally, were interobserver variability or repeatability tests performed?

Minor Technical Refinements

1. Terminology Consistency: There are inconsistencies in the use of terms such as "slow-time signals," "fast-time signals," and "RF signals." Ensure that terminology is uniform throughout the manuscript.

2. Equation Numbering and Formatting: Some equations (e.g., Doppler shift formula) are not properly referenced within the text. Ensure that equations are numbered correctly and referred to in explanations.

3. Language and Grammar Check: Although the authors claim that proofreading was done, it does not appear to have been performed by a native English speaker, as many minor grammatical errors remain. A final proofread for clarity and conciseness is essential. Some examples of errors are as follows:

• Missing Articles ("a," "an," "the")

Example 1: "The Twinkling Artifact (TA) is color Doppler artifact caused by acoustic radiation force and consequent tissue vibration during Doppler imaging."

Correction: "The Twinkling Artifact (TA) is a color Doppler artifact caused by the acoustic radiation force and the consequent tissue vibration during Doppler imaging."

Issue: "A" was missing before "color Doppler artifact," and definite articles ("the") were needed.

Example 2: "Figure 5 and 6 could benefit from clearer annotations."

Correction: "Figures 5 and 6 could benefit from clearer annotations."

Issue: When referring to multiple figures, "Figures" (plural) should be used instead of "Figure."

• Subject-Verb Agreement

Example 1: "The Doppler images that was constructed show the lesion formation."

Correction: "The Doppler images that were constructed show the lesion formation."

Issue: "Images" is plural, so the verb should be "were" instead of "was."

Example 2: "These results suggest that Twinkling Artifact is useful in monitoring thermal lesions and are in agreement with previous studies."

Correction: "These results suggest that the Twinkling Artifact is useful in monitoring thermal lesions and is in agreement with previous studies."

Issue: "Twinkling Artifact" is singular, so it should be "is" instead of "are."

• Inconsistent Tense Usage

Example 1: "In the study, we show that the Doppler signal extraction method provides reliable results and confirmed the presence of TA."

Correction: "In this study, we show that the Doppler signal extraction method provides reliable results and confirm the presence of TA."

Issue: The sentence shifts between present ("show") and past ("confirmed")—both should be in present tense for consistency.

Example 2: "The proposed method was tested and demonstrates a high level of accuracy."

Correction: "The proposed method was tested and demonstrated a high level of accuracy."

Issue: "Was tested" is past tense, so "demonstrates" should also be changed to past tense ("demonstrated") for consistency.

• Clarity and Redundancy

Example 1: "This study aims to investigate and analyze the role of the Twinkling Artifact for the purpose of lesion monitoring."

Correction: "This study analyzes the role of the Twinkling Artifact in lesion monitoring."

Issue: "Investigate and analyze" are redundant, and "for the purpose of" can be replaced with a simpler "in."

Example 2: "The obtained results are consistent and in agreement with previous studies."

Correction: "The results are consistent with previous studies."

Issue: "Consistent" and "in agreement" mean the same thing—one should be removed.

There are many many more issues regarding awkward phrasing and wordiness. Reading this manuscript is difficult due to the overwhelming number of grammatical errors. A simple grammar checker, such as Grammarly, would eliminate most of these issues!!!

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org

Attachment

Submitted filename: Review Comments.docx

pone.0324801.s003.docx (17.9KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Kisoo Kim

2 May 2025

Monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Thermal Therapy by Ultrasound Doppler Imaging Using Twinkling Artifact

PONE-D-24-41591R2

Dear Dr. Behnam,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Kisoo Kim, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Kisoo Kim

PONE-D-24-41591R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Behnam,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Kisoo Kim

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Review.pdf

    pone.0324801.s001.pdf (88.9KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0324801.s004.docx (23.7KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Review Comments.docx

    pone.0324801.s003.docx (17.9KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers_auresp_2.docx

    pone.0324801.s005.docx (18.2KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All the radio frequency (rf) data files used in this study, along with the two MATLAB codes developed for reading them, are publicly available in a Zenodo repository at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15188602.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES