A Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound Interface ASIC for Wearable Medical Therapeutic Device Applications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript presents the development of a portable medical device, ASIC, for wearable ultrasound measurement. The circuit design utilized a switched-capacitor DC-DC converter to achieve high voltage for ultrasound generation. The manuscript is well-written and organized; however, it may require clarification on certain points and some additional editing before acceptance for publication.

1. What is the advantage of conducting portable ultrasound measurement in MRI? Is it genuinely necessary? The author should provide more information in the introduction to give a general reader a sense of such applications.

2. How does the simulation in Figure 8 guide the design and measurement? This connection needs to be made explicit in the results section.

3. The figure format needs to adhere to the publication guidelines.

4. Figure 10 is challenging to read due to the numerous repeating units. The presentation needs improvement

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper introduces a portable interface chip and analyzes wearable medical treatment devices based on it. The proposed ASIC for LIPUS interface application in wearable medical devices addresses challenges related to scale and cost. In summary, the LIPUS interface chip offers a promising solution for developing MRI-compatible and cost-effective wearable medical treatment devices, contributing significantly to the field.

Detailed discussions include the ASIC's system structure, design details like the charge pump, and simulation test specifics. The method appropriately demonstrates circuit performance. It would enhance completeness to further explain the advantages and functions of the proposed charge pump. Additionally, thorough consideration of experimental design and data analysis allows for detailed presentation and comparison of test and simulation results.

To improve clarity, the authors should provide a concise description of specific objectives, methods, and results in the abstract and introduction. This will help readers better understand the research focus and contribution. A succinct conclusion is also recommended.

Major Comments:

Enhance details on the role and benefits of ultrasound in medical care, particularly highlighting the connection and advantages of LIPUS in medical applications. Ensure consistency in the formatting of all tables, including Table 2, throughout the manuscript.

Incorporate a reference to Table 2 within the manuscript where necessary.

Verify the formatting of all figures for accuracy.

The manuscript requires careful editing for English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure.

it is ok

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper presented a Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) interface chip with applications-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), designed for portable medical therapeutic applications. The main advantages of the proposed device include its miniature design enabled by the use of the charge pump, sufficient power output capacity that meets common therapeutic needs, and its compatibility with MRI procedures due to the absence of inductors.

The paper is well-written: introduction is clear and concise, the components constitute the proposed design are explained in detail, and results are back by experimental evidences.

A few comments from the reviewer:

- When introducing the system architecture and implementation, consider explicitly specifying the novelty of the proposed designs - that is, separate the integration of existing designs/methodologies from novel solutions introduced by this paper. In it’s current form, while the explanations are easy to follow, it is unclear the core novelty of each of the integrated components (e.g., is the charge pump a borrowed design from [24], per L91?)

- Are the experimental results obtained with the batteries as the power source, or lab DC supplies? Since the device is intended to be used with batteries in reality, it would be valuable to evaluate its performance under both stable lab power source and relatively inconsistent battery powers.

- Consider adding more thorough comparisons of the presented work v.s. previous designs in the Discussion section. For example, for the related work listed in Table 4, what are the electronics adopted by other researchers? What contributed to the outstanding performances of the new designs, and what trade-offs have been made between different designs?

- It would be beneficial to discuss briefly the results obtained from the simulations.

minor:

- table 3 is out of place

- typo L80 “high voltage output”?

- extra period in L273

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf