Abstract

Steady-state diffusion theory models of fluorescence in tissue have been investigated for recovering fluorophore concentrations and fluorescence quantum yield. Spatially resolved fluorescence, excitation and emission reflectance were calculated by diffusion theory and Monte Carlo simulations, and measured using a multi-fibre probe on tissue-simulating phantoms containing either aluminium phthalocyanine tetrasulfonate (AlPcS4), Photofrin® or meso-tetra-(4-sulfonatophenyl)-porphine dihydrochloride (TPPS4). The accuracy of the fluorophore concentration and fluorescence quantum yield recovered by three different models of spatially resolved fluorescence were compared. The models were based on: (a) weighted difference of the excitation and emission reflectance, (b) fluorescence due to a point excitation source or (c) fluorescence due to a pencil beam excitation source. When literature values for the fluorescence quantum yield were used for each of the fluorophores, the fluorophore absorption coefficient (and hence concentration) at the excitation wavelength (μa,x,f) was recovered with a root-mean-square accuracy of 11.4% using the point source model of fluorescence and 8.0% using the more complicated pencil beam excitation model. The accuracy was calculated over a broad range of optical properties and fluorophore concentrations. The weighted difference of reflectance model performed poorly, with a root-mean-square error in concentration of about 50%. Monte Carlo simulations suggest that there are some situations where the weighted difference of reflectance is as accurate as the other two models, although this was not confirmed experimentally. Estimates of the fluorescence quantum yield in multiple scattering media were also made by determining μa,x,f independently from the fitted absorption spectrum and applying the various diffusion theory models. The fluorescence quantum yields for AlPcS4 and TPPS4 were calculated to be 0.59 ± 0.03 and 0.121 ± 0.001 respectively using the point source model, and 0.63 ± 0.03 and 0.129 ± 0.002 using the pencil beam excitation model. These results are consistent with published values.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call