David R Busch1, Regine Choe2, Turgut Durduran3, Daniel H Friedman4, Wesley B Baker5, Andrew D Maidment6, Mark A Rosen6, Mitchell D Schnall6, Arjun G Yodh5. 1. Division of Neurology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104. Electronic address: drbusch@sdf.org. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. 3. ICFO-Institut de Ciències Fotòniques, Castelldefels (Barcelona), Spain. 4. Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 5. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 6. Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study measures hemodynamic properties such as blood flow and hemoglobin concentration and oxygenation in the healthy human breast under a wide range of compressive loads. Because many breast-imaging technologies derive contrast from the deformed breast, these load-dependent vascular responses affect contrast agent-enhanced and hemoglobin-based breast imaging. METHODS: Diffuse optical and diffuse correlation spectroscopies were used to measure the concentrations of oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin, lipid, water, and microvascular blood flow during axial breast compression in the parallel-plate transmission geometry. RESULTS: Significant reductions (P < .01) in total hemoglobin concentration (∼30%), blood oxygenation (∼20%), and blood flow (∼87%) were observed under applied pressures (forces) of up to 30 kPa (120 N) in 15 subjects. Lipid and water concentrations changed <10%. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging protocols based on injected contrast agents should account for variation in tissue blood flow due to mammographic compression. Similarly, imaging techniques that depend on endogenous blood contrasts will be affected by breast compression during imaging.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study measures hemodynamic properties such as blood flow and hemoglobin concentration and oxygenation in the healthy human breast under a wide range of compressive loads. Because many breast-imaging technologies derive contrast from the deformed breast, these load-dependent vascular responses affect contrast agent-enhanced and hemoglobin-based breast imaging. METHODS: Diffuse optical and diffuse correlation spectroscopies were used to measure the concentrations of oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin, lipid, water, and microvascular blood flow during axial breast compression in the parallel-plate transmission geometry. RESULTS: Significant reductions (P < .01) in total hemoglobin concentration (∼30%), blood oxygenation (∼20%), and blood flow (∼87%) were observed under applied pressures (forces) of up to 30 kPa (120 N) in 15 subjects. Lipid and water concentrations changed <10%. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging protocols based on injected contrast agents should account for variation in tissue blood flow due to mammographic compression. Similarly, imaging techniques that depend on endogenous blood contrasts will be affected by breast compression during imaging.
Authors: Molly L Flexman; Michael A Khalil; Rabah Al Abdi; Hyun K Kim; Christopher J Fong; Elise Desperito; Dawn L Hershman; Randall L Barbour; Andreas H Hielscher Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 3.170
Authors: Subhadra Srinivasan; Brian W Pogue; Colin Carpenter; Shudong Jiang; Wendy A Wells; Steven P Poplack; Peter A Kaufman; Keith D Paulsen Journal: Antioxid Redox Signal Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 8.401
Authors: J M Cochran; S H Chung; A Leproux; W B Baker; D R Busch; A M DeMichele; J Tchou; B J Tromberg; A G Yodh Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2017-04-12 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Wesley B Baker; Ashwin B Parthasarathy; David R Busch; Rickson C Mesquita; Joel H Greenberg; A G Yodh Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2014-10-28 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Amir Y Sajjadi; Steven J Isakoff; Bin Deng; Bhawana Singh; Christy M Wanyo; Qianqian Fang; Michelle C Specht; Lidia Schapira; Beverly Moy; Aditya Bardia; David A Boas; Stefan A Carp Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2017-01-04 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Kelly E Michaelsen; Venkataramanan Krishnaswamy; Linxi Shi; Srinivasan Vedantham; Andrew Karellas; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen; Steven P Poplack Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 3.170
Authors: Wesley B Baker; Zhe Li; Steven S Schenkel; Malavika Chandra; David R Busch; Erin K Englund; Kathryn H Schmitz; Arjun G Yodh; Thomas F Floyd; Emile R Mohler Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2017-10-05
Authors: Katharina Holland; Ioannis Sechopoulos; Ritse M Mann; Gerard J den Heeten; Carla H van Gils; Nico Karssemeijer Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Regine Choe; Mary E Putt; Peter M Carlile; Turgut Durduran; Joseph M Giammarco; David R Busch; Ki Won Jung; Brian J Czerniecki; Julia Tchou; Michael D Feldman; Carolyn Mies; Mark A Rosen; Mitchell D Schnall; Angela DeMichele; Arjun G Yodh Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 3.240