| Literature DB >> 33111509 |
Alireza Akbarzadeh1,2, Ehsan Edjlali1,2, Guillaume Sheehy1,2, Juliette Selb3, Rajeev Agarwal3, Jessie Weber4, Frédéric Leblond1,2.
Abstract
SIGNIFICANCE: Raman spectroscopy (RS) applied to surgical guidance is attracting attention among scientists in biomedical optics. Offering a computational platform for studying depth-resolved RS and probing molecular specificity of different tissue layers is of crucial importance to increase the precision of these techniques and facilitate their clinical adoption. AIM: The aim of this work was to present a rigorous analysis of inelastic scattering depth sampling and elucidate the relationship between sensing depth of the Raman effect and optical properties of the tissue under interrogation. APPROACH: A new Monte Carlo (MC) package was developed to simulate absorption, fluorescence, elastic, and inelastic scattering of light in tissue. The validity of the MC algorithm was demonstrated by comparison with experimental Raman spectra in phantoms of known optical properties using nylon and polydimethylsiloxane as Raman-active compounds. A series of MC simulations were performed to study the effects of optical properties on Raman sensing depth for an imaging geometry consistent with single-point detection using a handheld fiber optics probe system.Entities:
Keywords: Monte Carlo simulation; Raman spectroscopy; elastic scattering; fluorescence; metrology; tissue optics
Year: 2020 PMID: 33111509 PMCID: PMC7720906 DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.25.10.105002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomed Opt ISSN: 1083-3668 Impact factor: 3.170
Fig. 1Proposed MC algorithm including all the competing events in light–tissue interaction.
Generated random numbers.
| Name | Variable | Corresponding equation |
|---|---|---|
| Diffusion free path | ||
| Azimuthal direction of diffusion | ||
| Polar direction of diffusion | ||
| Russian Roulette | ||
| Probability of fluorescence shift | ||
| Probability of Raman shift | ||
| Probability of reflection at a surface |
Generic parameters of the camera/sensor implemented in the package.
| Parameter | Representation space |
|---|---|
| Position | |
| Orientation | |
| Resolution | |
| Field of view | (Near plane, far plane, angle of view) |
Fig. 2(a) Structural geometry of phantoms I (PDMS), II (nylon), and III (PDMS on the top nylon with ). Measured (b) absorption and (c) reduced scattering coefficients of nylon and synthetized PDMS samples.
Fig. 3Simulated versus measured fluorescence and Raman spectra of (a), (b) phantom I, (c), (d) phantom II, and (e), (f) phantom III, respectively.
Fig. 4(a) Cross-sectional view of the handheld interrogating probe. The red region with a diameter of indicates the source port, while the green region with a diameter of illustrates the collecting port. (b) Side-view of the detector geometry. (c) Side-view of source geometry. (d) Elastic and inelastic photon diffusion in a two-layered sample under illumination of a light beam.
Fig. 5(a) Cumulative percentage of detected Raman photon versus penetration depth for various Raman conversion rates within a phantom with and . (b) 75% and 90% Raman depths versus conversion rate.
Fig. 6Cumulative percentage of detected photons versus penetration depth for various absorption coefficients of a phantom with and (a) , (b) .
Fig. 7(a) and (c) 75% and 90% Raman depth versus absorption coefficient for various and . (b) and (d) 75% and 90% Raman depths versus scattering coefficient for various and .
Optical properties used in the sensing analysis and corresponding calculated Raman sensing depths.
| Parameters | Depth of 75% sensitivity ( | Depth of 90% sensitivity ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Absorbtion | Scattering | Mean free path ( | |||
| 0 to 1.4 | 0.5 | 200 | 270 to 600 | 75 to 160 | |
| 4 | 25 | 140 to 190 | 41 to 80 | ||
| 30 | 3.3 | 10 to 80 | 15 to 25 | ||
| 0.001 | 1 | 100 | 105 to 225 | 40 to 75 | |