Thomas J Desmettre1, Serge R Mordon. 1. EA 2689, INSERM IFR 114, Pavillon Vancostenobel, Lille University Hospital, 59037 Lille Cedex, France. desmettre@lille.inserm.fr
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For photodynamic therapy (PDT) or transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT) lasers, long irradiation time (typically 1 minute or longer) is used and a large area of retina is treated. Consequently, the power stability but also the light distribution within the laser beam plays a major role. This study aimed to evaluate beam intensity profiles produced by several PDT and TTT lasers. STUDY DESIGN/ MATERIALS AND METHODS: A beam profile analyzer (Cohu 4812 camera connected to a LPA-300PC, Spiricon, Logan, UT) was used to compare the beam profiles of PDT lasers: OPAL (Lumenis, USA); ACTIVIS (Quantel Medical, France), VISULAS (Zeiss, Germany). Spots of 2, 3, 4, and 5 mm were tested with each laser. Similarly, TTT lasers: OCULIGHT SLx (Iridex, CA) and IRIDIS trade mark (Quantel Medical, France) were evaluated with 2 and 3 mm spot diameter and power ranging from 200 to 1,000 mW. RESULTS: PDT lasers: OPAL had a "top hat" and homogeneous profile whatever the spot size. Numerous micro-spikes and micro-nadirs of power were observed with the ACTIVIS and the VISULAS. TTT lasers: for the IRIDIS the beam shape was rather gaussian, but the homogeneity was reduced by micro-spikes of power. With the OCULIGHT Slx the beam shape was rather top hat and only few micro-spikes or micro-nadirs of power could be disclosed. DISCUSSION: The literature tends to prove that the shape and homogeneity of the beam profile could play a role on the efficacy of the treatment. CONCLUSION: Since PDT and TTT lasers display different beam profiles, this parameter should be carefully evaluated when performing clinical evaluations of PDT or TTT treatments. Copyright 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: For photodynamic therapy (PDT) or transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT) lasers, long irradiation time (typically 1 minute or longer) is used and a large area of retina is treated. Consequently, the power stability but also the light distribution within the laser beam plays a major role. This study aimed to evaluate beam intensity profiles produced by several PDT and TTT lasers. STUDY DESIGN/ MATERIALS AND METHODS: A beam profile analyzer (Cohu 4812 camera connected to a LPA-300PC, Spiricon, Logan, UT) was used to compare the beam profiles of PDT lasers: OPAL (Lumenis, USA); ACTIVIS (Quantel Medical, France), VISULAS (Zeiss, Germany). Spots of 2, 3, 4, and 5 mm were tested with each laser. Similarly, TTT lasers: OCULIGHT SLx (Iridex, CA) and IRIDIS trade mark (Quantel Medical, France) were evaluated with 2 and 3 mm spot diameter and power ranging from 200 to 1,000 mW. RESULTS: PDT lasers: OPAL had a "top hat" and homogeneous profile whatever the spot size. Numerous micro-spikes and micro-nadirs of power were observed with the ACTIVIS and the VISULAS. TTT lasers: for the IRIDIS the beam shape was rather gaussian, but the homogeneity was reduced by micro-spikes of power. With the OCULIGHT Slx the beam shape was rather top hat and only few micro-spikes or micro-nadirs of power could be disclosed. DISCUSSION: The literature tends to prove that the shape and homogeneity of the beam profile could play a role on the efficacy of the treatment. CONCLUSION: Since PDT and TTT lasers display different beam profiles, this parameter should be carefully evaluated when performing clinical evaluations of PDT or TTT treatments. Copyright 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.