Abstract
Multispectral photoacoustic oximetry imaging (MPOI) is an emerging hybrid modality that enables the spatial mapping of blood oxygen saturation (SO2) to depths of several centimeters. To facilitate MPOI device development and clinical translation, well-validated performance test methods and improved quantitative understanding of physical processes and best practices are needed. We developed a breast-mimicking blood flow phantom with tunable SO2 and used this phantom to evaluate a custom MPOI system. Results provide quantitative evaluation of the impact of phantom medium properties (Intralipid versus polyvinyl chloride plastisol) and device design parameters (different transducers) on SO2 measurement accuracy, especially depth-dependent performance degradation due to fluence artifacts. This approach may guide development of standardized test methods for evaluating MPOI devices.
Highlights
1.1 Multispectral photoacoustic oximetry imagingPhotoacoustic imaging (PAI) is a rapidly emerging hybrid modality that combines pulsed optical excitation with acoustic detection to achieve imaging with both the high contrast of optical imaging and the deep tissue penetration afforded by ultrasound imaging [1]
We previously developed novel tissue-mimicking materials based on polyvinyl chloride plastisol (PVCP) and demonstrated their utility for phantom-based image quality testing of PAI systems [30,31,32]
To evaluate impact of phantom background material selection on test method results, we investigated both a simple liquid phantom comprised of 1% Intralipid (I141, Sigma-Aldrich, Inc.) and a breastmimicking polyvinyl chloride plastisol (PVCP) phantom with biologically relevant optical and acoustic properties [30,31,32]
Summary
1.1 Multispectral photoacoustic oximetry imagingPhotoacoustic imaging (PAI) is a rapidly emerging hybrid modality that combines pulsed optical excitation with acoustic detection to achieve imaging with both the high contrast of optical imaging and the deep tissue penetration afforded by ultrasound imaging [1]. The lack of well-validated standardized performance test methods is a significant barrier to rapid translation and maturation of optical imaging and spectroscopy devices [14] This is especially true for PAI devices because: 1) PAI employs complex hybrid mechanisms requiring careful consideration/replication of both optical and acoustic effects in performance tests, 2) PAI is being investigated for many different applications, resulting in wide variation in device configurations and parameters that may necessitate different types of testing (e.g., linear-array vs circular scanning systems, optical wavelengths, acoustic frequency range), and 3) there are currently no FDA-approved PAIbased medical devices, there is a growing number of commercially available devices for preclinical research and exploratory clinical use [15,16,17,18,19]. There is a current need to develop standardized performance test methods so that as PAI technology matures, wellvalidated approaches are available to streamline many parts of the product life cycle including device development and optimization, inter-device comparison, regulatory decision-making, quality assurance and quality control, maintenance and constancy testing, user training, regulatory evaluation, standardization, and accreditation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
