If you choose a lower-frequency transducer to image a highly attenuating structure, what trade off are you making?

If you choose a lower-frequency transducer to image a highly attenuating structure, what trade off are you making?

• A. Increased penetration for improved resolution.
• B. Decreased penetration for improved resolution.
• C. Decreased spatial resolution for improved penetration.
• D. Increased round-trip travel time for improved resolution.

Answer: (C)

Lower frequency waves suffer less attenuation, so they can image deeper into tissue. That’s why you’d choose a lower-frequency transducer for a highly attenuating structure. But the longer wavelength of these lower-frequency waves reduces spatial resolution, making the image blurrier. So you accept decreased spatial resolution in exchange for improved penetration. The round-trip travel time isn’t driven by frequency; it’s about depth and sound speed.

Lower frequency waves suffer less attenuation, so they can image deeper into tissue. That’s why you’d choose a lower-frequency transducer for a highly attenuating structure. But the longer wavelength of these lower-frequency waves reduces spatial resolution, making the image blurrier. So you accept decreased spatial resolution in exchange for improved penetration. The round-trip travel time isn’t driven by frequency; it’s about depth and sound speed.