Iu elite

All subjects were at least 12 h on an empty stomach and in supine position during examination. The ultrasound examinations were performed by a qualified and experienced radiologist using a high-resolution ultrasound machine equipped with a 5 MHz convex-array probe (Philips iU Elite; Bothell, Washington). The data were evaluated by another experienced radiologist to ensure unbiased evaluation.
NAFLD was diagnosed as the presence of at least two of the following findings (excluding excessive alcohol consumption and viral or autoimmune liver disease): diffusely increased echogenitic (“bright”) liver with liver echogenicity greater than kidney or spleen, vascular blurring, and deep attenuation of ultrasound signal [23 (link)].
The diagnosis of NAFPD was based on the previous literature criteria [24 (link)]: Pancreatic echogenicity was compared to the liver echogenicity at the same depth on a longitudinal scan taken near the abdominal midline, or compared to the echogenicity of renal cortex if the liver also showed increased echogenicity. NAFPD was diagnosed if an increased echogenicity of pancreatic body over the kidney or liver echogenicity was observed during ultrasonography.

To compare the ultrasonic imaging ability of the nanobubbles and microbubbles, in vitro ultrasound imaging experiments were performed. Briefly, 1 mL of NB or MB suspension at various bubble concentrations (from 1.0 × 10⁵ to 1.0 × 10⁹ bubbles/mL) was added to the sample wells of a homemade 2% (w/v) agarose mold. A clinical ultrasound scanner (Philips IU Elite) system with an L12-5 high-frequency linear transducer was used. Mechanical index (MI) was 0.10. The focal zone was placed at a depth of 1.5 cm, which was at the center of the sample well. Three images of each sample were taken. ImageJ software was used to analyze the grayscale values of the samples. The quantitative grayscale ultrasonic intensity of the samples was normalized to that of gas-free water. The intensity value was defined as the ratio of the grayscale value of the contrast agent to that of gas-free water.

Three RA patients and three healthy controls were included in the study. Ultrasound imaging of their lymph nodes was conducted using a Philips IU Elite ultrasound diagnostic instrument (Philips Healthcare, Seattle, WA) equipped with a L15‐7io probe. The study protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Xiangya Hospital Central South University. All subjects signed an informed consent before participation in the study. Published dataset (GSE93776) was used for bioinformatic analysis of bulk RNA‐seq of human PBMCs.^[39]

An in vivo evaluation of renal calculus formation, cortical thickness and renal perfusion was conducted using an ultrasound system (iU Elite; Philips Healthcare) with B‐mode ultrasonography, USE and CDFI as the specific imaging modalities, respectively.

Trained and certified sonographers measured CIMT of all individuals who stayed in the supine position and turned their heads 45° to the contralateral side of the artery using iU Elite (Royal Philips) with an L9-3 transducer. Sonographers scanned the far wall of the common carotid artery (CCA) and the carotid bifurcations at both the left and right carotid arteries, measuring the distance from the edge of the first echogenic line to the edge of the second echogenic line. The definition of CA is the largest CCA IMT ≥ 1.0 mm or plaques, or the largest carotid bifurcation IMT ≥ 1.2 mm (23 (link), 24 (link)). All these measurements were conducted three times to ensure that the intrameasure and intermeasure CVs were <2.9%.

Ultrasonography was carried out with an IU Elite^® (Philips Healthcare, Best, Netherlands). Mammography was performed using Selenia^® Dimensions (Hologic, Santiago, USA). Breast MRI was conducted on a Discovery^® MR750W (GE Healthcare, Illinois, USA). All imaging results were analyzed by two qualified radiologists, using criteria from the American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS or following the Society of Nuclear Medicine operative guidelines. ACR BI-RADS was used for risk assessment of likelihoods of BC, with scores/categories of 1–6 representing negative, benign, probably benign, suspicious or indeterminate abnormality, highly suggestive of malignancy, and known cancer, respectively. Category 4 can be further divided into three sub-categories: 4A, 4B, and 4C for a low, moderate, and high suspicion of malignancy (18 ). Breast tissue composition and tumor size were visually estimated according to BI-RADS classification (18 ).