Back

Null Subtraction Imaging for Functional Ultrasound Brain Activation Mapping

Garay, G.; Barolin, J.; Sorriba, V.; Damian, J. P.; Kou, Z.; Oelze, M.; Negreira, C.; Kun, A.; Brum, J.

2026-04-17 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.04.14.718533 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Null Subtraction Imaging (NSI) is a nonlinear beamforming approach that combines multiple receive apodizations and subtraction to improve spatial resolution in ultrasound imaging. In NSI, a DC offset parameter is introduced in the apodization design to control the sharpening of the effective beam pattern and, therefore, the degree of spatial-resolution enhancement. Here, we investigate the use of NSI in functional ultrasound (fUS) imaging of the mouse brain and compare its performance with conventional delay-and-sum (DAS) beamforming across a range of DC offset values. fUS acquisitions were performed in three anesthetized wild-type mice during periodic vibrissae stimulation. Activation maps were computed by correlating cerebral blood volume (CBV) signals with the stimulation pattern. Activation area, edge gradient, Dice similarity coefficient, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were used to evaluate spatial localization, boundary sharpness, vascular alignment and signal stability, respectively. NSI yielded more spatially confined activation maps than DAS and produced sharper activation boundaries. However, for low DC offsets (DC < 0.5), the CBV signal exhibited increased fluctuations, which reduced temporal stability and limited the reliability of the functional maps. As the DC offset increased, temporal SNR improved, while the spatial-resolution gain progressively decreased. In our imaging configuration, intermediate DC values around DC {approx} 0.5 provided the most favorable compromise between improved spatial localization and sufficient temporal stability for reliable functional activation detection. These results demonstrate the feasibility of applying NSI to functional ultrasound imaging and provide a quantitative framework for selecting the DC parameter in fUS studies.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.1%
2
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 6%
10.2%
3
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
72 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.2%
4
Photoacoustics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
5
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
6
Physics in Medicine & Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.8%
7
Optics Letters
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.2%
9
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 42%
3.2%
10
Brain Stimulation
112 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.2%
11
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
12
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
13
Biomedical Optics Express
84 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.0%
14
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
15
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.6%
17
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
18
Journal of Biophotonics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
19
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.2%
20
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
21
Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
22
Journal of Biomedical Optics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.9%
23
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.9%
24
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 18%
0.8%
25
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
26
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Bioengineering
24 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%