JUM AIUM Career Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
© 2008 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine
J Ultrasound Med 27:503-515 • 0278-4297


AIUM Bioeffects Consensus Report

American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Consensus Report on Potential Bioeffects of Diagnostic Ultrasound

Executive Summary

Bioeffects Committee of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine

Address correspondence to J. Brian Fowlkes, PhD, Basic Radiological Sciences Division, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Kresge III, Room 3320, 200 Zina Pitcher Pl, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0553 USA. E-mail: fowlkes{at}umich.edu

Abstract

The continued examination of potential biological effects of ultrasound and their relationship to clinical practice is a key element in evaluating the safety of diagnostic ultrasound. Periodically, the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine (AIUM) sponsors conferences bringing experts together to examine the literature on ultrasound bioeffects and to develop conclusions and recommendations related to diagnostic ultrasound. The most recent effort included the examination of effects whose origins were thermal or nonthermal, with separate evaluations for potential effects related to fetal ultrasound. In addition, potential effects due to the introduction of ultrasound contrast agents were summarized. This information can be used to assess risks in comparison to the benefits of diagnostic ultrasound. The conclusions and recommendations are organized into 5 broad categories, with a comprehensive background and evaluation of each topic provided in the corresponding articles in this issue. The following summary is not meant as a substitute for the detailed examination of issues presented in each of the articles but rather as a means to facilitate further study of this consensus report and implementation of its recommendations. The conclusions and recommendations are the result of several rounds of deliberations at the consensus conference, subsequent review by the Bioeffects Committee of the AIUM, and approval by the AIUM Board of Governors.

Key Words: bioeffects • contrast • mechanical effects • safety • thermal effects

Abbreviations: AIUM, American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine • ALARA, as low as reasonably achievable • FDA, Food and Drug Administration • MI, mechanical index • ODS, output display standard • TI, thermal index • TIB, thermal index for bone • TIS, thermal index for soft tissue




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
T. R. Nelson, J. B. Fowlkes, J. S. Abramowicz, and C. C. Church
Ultrasound Biosafety Considerations for the Practicing Sonographer and Sonologist
J. Ultrasound Med., February 1, 2009; 28(2): 139 - 150.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.