OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Michael Duncan
  • Vol. 10, Iss. 15 — Jul. 29, 2002
  • pp: 707–713
« Show journal navigation

Complementary use of cross-polarization and standard OCT for differential diagnosis of pathological tissues

R. V. Kuranov, V. V. Sapozhnikova, I. V. Turchin, E. V. Zagainova, V. M. Gelikonov, V. A. Kamensky, L. B. Snopova, and N. N. Prodanetz  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 10, Issue 15, pp. 707-713 (2002)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.10.000707


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (1557 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

An experimental standard optical coherence tomography (OCT) setup that can be easily modified for cross-polarization OCT (CP OCT) operation has been developed to perform differential diagnosis of pathological tissues. The complementary use of CP OCT, a technique that provides a map of cross-polarization backscattering properties of an object being studied by means of low-coherence interferometry, and standard OCT imaging improves the specificity of diagnostics of pathological changes occurring in tissues. It is shown that healthy, neoplastic and scar tissues of the esophagus have different cross-polarization backscattering properties. A comparative analysis of CP OCT, OCT and histological images from one and the same tissue area has been made. A close correlation between the location of collagen fibers in biological tissue and signal intensity in CP OCT images is found.

© 2002 Optical Society of America

1. Introduction

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) [1–3

1. D. Huang, J. Wang, C.P. Lin, J. S. Shuman, W.G. Stinson, W. Chang, M.R. Hee, T. Flotte, K. Gregory, C.A. Puliafito, and J.G. Fujimoto, “Optical coherence tomography,” Science 254, 1178–1181, (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] is a noninvasive method for 2D imaging of internal micro structure of transparent [1

1. D. Huang, J. Wang, C.P. Lin, J. S. Shuman, W.G. Stinson, W. Chang, M.R. Hee, T. Flotte, K. Gregory, C.A. Puliafito, and J.G. Fujimoto, “Optical coherence tomography,” Science 254, 1178–1181, (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and highly scattering objects [2

2. V.M. Gelikonov, G.V. Gelikonov, R.V. Kuranov, K.I. Pravdenko, A.M. Sergeev, F.I. Feldchtein, Ya.I. Khanin, D.V. Shabanov, N.D. Gladkova, N.K. Nikulin, G.A. Petrova, and V.V. Pochinko, “Coherent optical tomography of microscopic inhomogeneties in biological tissues,” JETP Lett. 61, 158–162, (1995).

]. This method provides in vivo information on the internal structure of biological objects with high resolution and in real time. Multiple experiments conducted by different research groups have shown that OCT is sensitive to structural alterations in biological objects that occur at the level of cell groups and tissue layers [4–7

4. N.M. Shakhova, V.M. Gelikonov, V.A. Kamensky, R.V. Kuranov, and I.V. Turchin, “Clinical aspects of the endoscopic optical coherence tomography and the ways for improving its diagnostic value,” Laser Physics 12, 617–626, (2002).

]. Our research team studied more than 1000 patients with different pathologies [8–11

8. F.I. Feldchtein, G.V. Gelikonov, V.M. Gelikonov, R.R. Iksanov, R.V. Kuranov, A.M. Sergeev, N.D. Gladkova, M.N. Ourutina, J.A. Warren., and D.H. Reitze, “In vivo imaging of hard and soft tissue of the oral cavity,” Opt. Express 3, 239–250, (1998), http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-239. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The clinical studies show that morphological structures and tissue layers have differing optical parameters due to their spatial organization. In the OCT images healthy tissues are visualized as several layers with distinct borders. Because of the difference in scattering properties of the epithelium and fiber connective-tissue structures, OCT can image layer by layer the architectonics of healthy lining tissues. As pathology develops, the tissue structure changes. OCT can detect the morphological changes in different pathologies. Specifically, neoplastic processes are characterized by most pronounced reorganization of tissue structure. OCT images of cancer are structureless and, as a rule, show fast signal decay with depth. OCT is informative with regard to structural alterations in tissue, although it does not specify the origin of these alterations. Using OCT imaging, it is very difficult to differentiate inflammatory processes, papillomatosis, cancer, and scar changes (Fig. 1,4a,5a).

In many pathologies structural violations are preceded by biochemical and initial morphological changes. It is known that some structural components of biotissue, e.g., stromal collagen fibers that constitute the basis of healthy mucosa, can strongly depolarize incident radiation [12

12. S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, and K. Lee, “Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,” Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119–129, (2000). [CrossRef]

]. Also fibrous tissues such as collagens are linear birefringent, i.e., they change the polarization state of light, depending on the value of birefringence and penetrated tissue depth [13

13. D.J. Maitland and J.T. Walsh Jr, “Quantitative measurements of linear birefringence during heating of native collagen,” Lasers Sur. Med. 20, 310–318, (1997). [CrossRef]

]. Both these processes lead to the appearance of cross-polarized component in backscattered light. Pathological processes with different origin are characterized by the difference in both the amount of collagen fibers and their spatial organization. Therefore, a comparative analysis of cross-polarization backscattering properties of biological objects may be taken as an underlying point of the technique for early diagnosis of neoplastic processes.

Fig. 1. Standard OCT images printed in logarithmic scale of different diseases a) laryngitis (chronic inflammation of larynx) b) laryngeal cancer c) laryngeal papilloma. White bar corresponds to 1 mm.

The aim of this paper is to study the possibility of differentiating between healthy, neoplastic and scar tissues using complementarily CP OCT and standard OCT. The differential diagnosis relies on obtaining maps of two independent physical characteristics – backscattering coefficient and cross-polarized backscatter degree of healthy and pathological tissues. We associate the difference in cross-polarization backscattering properties of biotissues in this case with the amount, localization and spatial organization of stromal collagen fibers.

2. Materials and methods

A sketch of the experimental setup used to map the backscattering coefficient and cross-polarized backscatter degree is shown in Fig. 2. Using a multiplexer, low-coherence near-IR radiation (λ=1.3μm) from a superluminescent diode (SLD) with a coherence length lc=21μm is combined with radiation from a semiconductor red laser (RL) used for alignment purposes. Then one of polarization eigenmodes of a polarization-maintaining (PM) 3dB fiber coupler is selected by means of Lefevre polarization controller (CP). PM fiber is used to transport radiation with a certain polarization state both in the signal and reference arms. When there is no Faraday rotator (F) in the reference arm, a co-polarized component of backscattered radiation is recorded. The influence of the Faraday rotator consists in the rotation of an arbitrary polarization state by a specified angle and the direction of the rotation depends only in the direction of the magnetic field inside the rotator and does not depend on the propagation direction of the radiation [21

21. V.M. Gelikonov, D.D. Gusovskii, V.I. Leonov, and M.A. Novikov, “Birefringence compensation in single-mode optical fibers,” Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 13, 322–323, (1987).

]. Therefore, in case of the 45° Faraday rotator, the radiation passes through it, gets reflected by a mirror, goes back through the rotator and becomes orthogonally polarized in the reference arm. As a result, only the light component which is cross-polarized by the biological object interferes. In [19

19. J.M. Schmitt and S.H. Xiang, “Cross-polarized backscatter in optical coherence tomography of biological tissue,” Opt. Lett. 23, 1060–1062, (1998). [CrossRef]

] a quarter wave plate oriented at 450 to the incident polarization was used for this purpose. We use the Faraday rotator instead because it does not need the angle alignment, therefore minimizing the realignment time for the whole system. The readjustment of the system takes 30 s. The acquisition time for one OCT image is 1 s. For all OCT images the logarithmic intensity scale is used. The lateral resolution of the system determined by the waist diameter of the probing beam is chosen very close to the longitudinal (in depth) resolution which is determined by lc=21μm. It should be noted that when the system was readjusted to obtain images in the orthogonal polarization the position of the probe was fixed. Therefore, both types of images from one and the same place were obtained. Since this design is based on PM fiber, a portable setup with flexible probe can be created, making it easy to use in clinical applications, e.g. endoscopically [4

4. N.M. Shakhova, V.M. Gelikonov, V.A. Kamensky, R.V. Kuranov, and I.V. Turchin, “Clinical aspects of the endoscopic optical coherence tomography and the ways for improving its diagnostic value,” Laser Physics 12, 617–626, (2002).

].

Fig.2 The experimental setup for the cross-polarization OCT. CS – crossectional scanner, O – investigated object, PS – longitudinal piezo-scanner, L – lenses, PD – photodiode, SA – selective amplifier, LA – logarithmic amplifier, AD – amplitude detector, ADC – analog to digital converter, PC – personal computer. Bold line corresponds to single-mode fiber, thin line - to polarization maintaining fiber.

To verify OCT and CP OCT images we made parallel analysis of biopsy samples taken from the same tissue regions where OCT imaging was performed. The biopsy samples were H&E and Van Gieson stained [22

22. R.D. Lillie, Histopathologic technic and practical histochemistry (McGraw-Hill book company, New York-Toronto-Sydney-London, 1965), Chap. 15, or http://www.ebsciences.com/staining/van_gies.htm.

]. The latter staining is specific for collagen fibers of connective tissue.

3. Results

The results of OCT study of healthy esophagus are presented in Fig. 3. Tomograms of unaltered esophageal mucosa obtained in both polarizations have a layered horizontally organized pattern. In the direct polarization (Fig. 3a) the epithelium is seen as a moderately scattering zone with distinct boundary with the higher backscattering underlying stroma. In the orthogonal polarization (Fig. 3b) the epithelium appears as a very poorly scattering layer. Nuclei of the epithelium in Fig. 3d,e have brown staining. The main fibrous component of the stroma is collagen fibers (red staining in Fig.3d,e), which provide, according to paper [12

12. S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, and K. Lee, “Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,” Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119–129, (2000). [CrossRef]

], efficient depolarization and according to paper [13

13. D.J. Maitland and J.T. Walsh Jr, “Quantitative measurements of linear birefringence during heating of native collagen,” Lasers Sur. Med. 20, 310–318, (1997). [CrossRef]

] birefringence of tissue. These explain the presence of an intense signal in the CP OCT images. The signal level in the CP OCT image is 18-20 dB lower compared to the standard OCT image. In the stroma, stripes that are oriented along the epithelium are seen in the CP OCT image (indicated by arrows). These structures correlate well with collagen fiber bundles oriented along the epithelium (Fig. 3e). The transverse size of these collagen bundles in Fig. 3e and of the stripe structures in Fig. 3b is 70-80 μm.

Fig. 3. a) Standard OCT image, b) CP OCT image c) H&E histology d), e) Van Gieson histology of healthy esophagus. White bar corresponds to 1 mm.

Images of carcinoma and scar tissue of the esophagus are shown respectively in Fig.4,5. Standard OCT images (Fig. 4a and Fig. 5a) are scarcely distinguishable. The both images are structureless. Therefore, using standard OCT it is impossible to differentiate between neoplastic and scar changes. The diagnosis in this case is based on endoscopy and histology (Fig. 4c and Fig. 5c). However, CP OCT images of these pathologies (Fig. 4 b and 5 b) are considerably different. Cancer cells almost do not cross-polarize probing radiation and the signal level is 10 dB lower on the average than that in CP OCT images of healthy tissue. In the CP OCT images vertically-oriented regions of stronger signal are noted against this background of weak signal (Fig. 4b). These images correlate with single vertically-oriented collagen fibers in Fig. 4d, where they are visualized as red elongated individual structures.

Fig. 4. a) Standard OCT image, b) CP OCT image c) H&E histology d),e) Van Gieson histology of cancerous esophagus. White bar corresponds to 1 mm where not specially marked.

CP OCT images of scar tissue of the esophagus show considerable signal level, comparable to that in healthy tissue (Fig. 5b). At the same time, in the CP OCT image one can note quite a large number of chaotically oriented regions of both intense and weak signal. This is because the nature of scar tissue organization is different than in cancer. It is seen from Fig. 5d that collagen fibers are one of the main components of an immature scar (pink regions correspond to maturing collagen). In Fig. 5d the collagen regions are alternating with regions of cell accumulation of granular tissue, which correlates well with the signal behavior in the CP OCT image of scar. The difference in structural features of collagen fibers in cancer and scar tissue forms the basis of CP OCT differentiation of these pathologies since their cross-polarization backscattering properties are determined, in a considerable degree, by anisotropic structures, i.e., by collagens.

Fig. 5. a) Standard OCT image, b) CP OCT image c) H&E histology d),e) Van Gieson histology of scar esophagus. White bar corresponds to 1 mm where not specially marked.

4. Discussion

The value of macroscopic birefringence of native collagen as measured by Maitlaind and Walsh in rat tendon is Δn = (3 ± 0.6) ∙ 10-3 [13

13. D.J. Maitland and J.T. Walsh Jr, “Quantitative measurements of linear birefringence during heating of native collagen,” Lasers Sur. Med. 20, 310–318, (1997). [CrossRef]

]. The period of intensity oscillations in CP OCT image due to this should be equal to the quarter of the beat length which covers the range from 360 μm to 540 μm for a wavelength of 1.3 μm. Thus macroscopic birefringence could be the reason of the stripes in Fig.3,b because the distance between them is about 100-140μm. Since in other CP OCT images such periodic structures are not seen, we attribute the signal on them to depolarization properties of biotissues [12

12. S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, and K. Lee, “Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,” Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119–129, (2000). [CrossRef]

,19

19. J.M. Schmitt and S.H. Xiang, “Cross-polarized backscatter in optical coherence tomography of biological tissue,” Opt. Lett. 23, 1060–1062, (1998). [CrossRef]

]. The non-periodical signal in Fig.3,b we also attribute to depolarization properties of healthy esophagus.

In the technique presented herein the sample illuminates by plane polarized light. Therefore it is sensitive to orientation of fiber-like structures, such as collagen, with respect to the polarization plane. Indeed we observed the difference of signal intensity of up to 15 dB in CP OCT images of kevlar fibers when we rotated the probe in the plane parallel to the orientation of fibers. Thus it could have been a disadvantage as compared to other PS OCT techniques where the sample is either illuminated with circularly polarized light or subsequently with different polarization states. But regardless of the fact that stromal collagen fibers are oriented along the epithelium, they are chaotically oriented in the plane parallel to the tissue surface [12

12. S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, and K. Lee, “Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,” Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119–129, (2000). [CrossRef]

]. It means that CP OCT images qualitatively should not depend on the direction of probing beam polarization. This statement is confirmed by our studies of all three types of tissues considered above: healthy, cancerous and scar esophagus.

Compared to other PS OCT systems that record two polarization states simultaneously and therefore get the total information on intensity and polarization simultaneously [14–16

14. K. Schoenenberger, B.W. Colston Jr., D.J. Maitland, L.B. DaSilva, and M.J. Everett, “Mapping of birefringence and thermal damage in tissue by use of polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography,” Appl. Opt. 37, 6026–6036, (1998). [CrossRef]

], the method presented in the paper needs two subsequent measurements with a realignment time of 30 seconds. For in vivo measurements the influence of reflex movement of the object should be avoided. The usual way here is to reduce the acquisition time up to 1 second and less. In our technique we avoided movement artifacts by gently touching investigated tissue by probe, i.e. during the process of image acquisition a probe is moving together with the patient’s movement. During the realignment of the reference arm to process the image in the orthogonal polarization the probe is held on tissue, therefore no relocation of the same area is needed. Thus the acquisition time of 30 seconds for two polarizations measurements for in vivo studies is not convenient but accessible. At the moment we are working on creation of a new setup for simultaneous recording of standard and cross-polarization OCT images. For this purpose instead of the 450 Faraday rotator (see Fig.2) a 22.50 Faraday rotator in the reference arm will be employed. In this case light reflected by mirror MR and double passed through the 22.50 Faraday rotator will be plane polarized at an angle of 450 to the eigenmodes of the PM fiber in the reference arm. Thus the eigenmodes will be excited with equal weight. The amplitudes of the interferometric signal in the cross-polarization and co-polarization axes will be determined by tissue backscatter components in corresponding polarization. To simultaneously record the interferometric signal in both polarizations spatially resolved by Wollaston, Glan-Laser polarizers or by a polarizing beam-splitter, two photodetectors will be used, like in other PS OCT techniques [14–16

14. K. Schoenenberger, B.W. Colston Jr., D.J. Maitland, L.B. DaSilva, and M.J. Everett, “Mapping of birefringence and thermal damage in tissue by use of polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography,” Appl. Opt. 37, 6026–6036, (1998). [CrossRef]

].

5. Conclusions

The experimental setup provides successive maps of backscattering coefficient (standard OCT images) and cross-polarized backscatter degree (CP OCT images) from one and the same site on a sample at readjustment time of 30 s. It is shown that standard OCT and CP OCT, when used complementarily, can differentiate between healthy mucosa, neoplastic and scar tissues of the esophagus. The cross-polarized backscatter degree of probing radiation in neoplastic tissues is on the average 10 dB lower than in healthy and scar tissues. In the CP OCT images, scar tissue does not have the layered structure that is evident in CP OCT images of healthy tissue. Van Gieson histology shows that the changes in cross-polarization backscattering properties of biotissues correlate well with the quantity, localization and spatial organization of collagen fibers in stroma. CP OCT can provide additional information on cross-polarization backscattering properties of biotissues, thereby improving the diagnostic value and informativity of standard OCT imaging.

Acknowledgments

CRDF awards #RB2-542 and #RB2-2389-NN-02 are gratefully acknowledged.

References and Links

1.

D. Huang, J. Wang, C.P. Lin, J. S. Shuman, W.G. Stinson, W. Chang, M.R. Hee, T. Flotte, K. Gregory, C.A. Puliafito, and J.G. Fujimoto, “Optical coherence tomography,” Science 254, 1178–1181, (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2.

V.M. Gelikonov, G.V. Gelikonov, R.V. Kuranov, K.I. Pravdenko, A.M. Sergeev, F.I. Feldchtein, Ya.I. Khanin, D.V. Shabanov, N.D. Gladkova, N.K. Nikulin, G.A. Petrova, and V.V. Pochinko, “Coherent optical tomography of microscopic inhomogeneties in biological tissues,” JETP Lett. 61, 158–162, (1995).

3.

J.M. Schmitt, “Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT): A Review,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1205–1215, (1999). [CrossRef]

4.

N.M. Shakhova, V.M. Gelikonov, V.A. Kamensky, R.V. Kuranov, and I.V. Turchin, “Clinical aspects of the endoscopic optical coherence tomography and the ways for improving its diagnostic value,” Laser Physics 12, 617–626, (2002).

5.

M.E. Brezinski and J.G. Fujimoto, “Optical Coherence Tomography: High-Resolution Imaging in Nontransparent Tissue,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1185–1192, (1999). [CrossRef]

6.

C. Pitris, C. Jesser, S.A. Boppart, D. Stemper, M.E. Brezinski, and J.G. Fujimoto, “Feasibility of optical coherence tomography for high-resolution imaging of human gastrointestinal tract malignancies,” J. Gastroenterol. 35, 87–92, (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

7.

N.D. Gladkova, G.A. Petrova, N.K. Nikulin, S.G. Radenska-Lopovok, L.B. Snopova, V.A. Nasonova, G.V. Gelikonov, V.M Gelikonov, R.V. Kuranov, A.M. Sergeev, and F.I. Feldchtein,“In vivo optical coherence tomography imaging of human skin: norm and pathology,” Skin Research and Technology 6, 6–16, (2000). [CrossRef]

8.

F.I. Feldchtein, G.V. Gelikonov, V.M. Gelikonov, R.R. Iksanov, R.V. Kuranov, A.M. Sergeev, N.D. Gladkova, M.N. Ourutina, J.A. Warren., and D.H. Reitze, “In vivo imaging of hard and soft tissue of the oral cavity,” Opt. Express 3, 239–250, (1998), http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-239. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

A.V. Shakhov, A.B. Terentjeva, V.A. Kamensky, L.B. Snopova, V.M. Gelikonov, F.I. Feldchtein, and A.M. Sergeev, “Optical Coherence Tomography Monitoring for Laser Surgery of Laryngeal Carcinoma,” J. Surg. Oncology 77, 253–259, (2001). [CrossRef]

10.

G. Zuccaro, N.D. Gladkova, J. Vargo, F.I. Feldchtein, E.V. Zagaynova, D. Conwell, G.W. Falk, J.R. Goldblum, J. Dumot, J. Ponsky, G.V. Gelikonov, B. Davros, E. Donchenko, and J.E. Richter, “Optical coherence tomography of the esophagus and proximal stomach in health and disease,” Am. J. Gastroenter. 96, 2633–2639, (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

11.

E.V. Zagaynova, O.S. Streltsova, N.D. Gladkova, L.B. Snopova, G.V. Gelikonov, F.I. Feldchtein, and A.N. Morozov, “In vivo optical coherence tomography feasibility for bladder disease,” J. Urology 167, 1492–1496, (2002). [CrossRef]

12.

S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, and K. Lee, “Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,” Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119–129, (2000). [CrossRef]

13.

D.J. Maitland and J.T. Walsh Jr, “Quantitative measurements of linear birefringence during heating of native collagen,” Lasers Sur. Med. 20, 310–318, (1997). [CrossRef]

14.

K. Schoenenberger, B.W. Colston Jr., D.J. Maitland, L.B. DaSilva, and M.J. Everett, “Mapping of birefringence and thermal damage in tissue by use of polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography,” Appl. Opt. 37, 6026–6036, (1998). [CrossRef]

15.

J.F. de Boer, S.M. Srinivas, A. Malekafzali, Z.P. Chen, and J.S. Nelson, “Imaging thermally damaged tissue by polarization sensitive optical coherence tomography,” Opt. Express 3, 212–218, (1998), http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-212. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16.

J.F. de Boer, S.M. Srinivas, B.H. Park, T.H. Pham, Z.P. Chen, T.E. Milner, and J.S. Nelson, “Polarization effects in optical coherence tomography of various biological tissues,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1200–1204, (1999). [CrossRef]

17.

A. Baumgartner, S. Dichtl, C.K. Hitzenberger, H. Sattmann, B. Robl, A. Moritz, Z.F. Fercher, and W. Sperr, “Polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography of dental structures,” Caries Research 34, 59–69, (2000). [CrossRef]

18.

W. Drexler, D. Stamper, C. Jesser, X.D. Li, C. Pitris, K. Saunders, S. Martin, M.B. Lodge, J.G. Fujimoto, and M.E. Brezinski, “Correlation of collagen organization with polarization sensitive imaging of in vitro cartilage: Implications for osteoarthritis,” J. Rheumatol. 28, 1311–1318, (2001). [PubMed]

19.

J.M. Schmitt and S.H. Xiang, “Cross-polarized backscatter in optical coherence tomography of biological tissue,” Opt. Lett. 23, 1060–1062, (1998). [CrossRef]

20.

R.V. Kuranov, V.M. Gelikonov, A.V. Shakhov, A.B. Terentyeva, I.V. Turchin, and V.A. Kamensky, “Mapping depolarization properties of biotissues for increasing specificity of OCT,” in OSA Biomed. Top. Meeting, OSA Tech. Digest , (Optical Society of America, Washington DC, 2002), pp.275–277.

21.

V.M. Gelikonov, D.D. Gusovskii, V.I. Leonov, and M.A. Novikov, “Birefringence compensation in single-mode optical fibers,” Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 13, 322–323, (1987).

22.

R.D. Lillie, Histopathologic technic and practical histochemistry (McGraw-Hill book company, New York-Toronto-Sydney-London, 1965), Chap. 15, or http://www.ebsciences.com/staining/van_gies.htm.

OCIS Codes
(170.4500) Medical optics and biotechnology : Optical coherence tomography
(170.4580) Medical optics and biotechnology : Optical diagnostics for medicine
(260.5430) Physical optics : Polarization

ToC Category:
Research Papers

History
Original Manuscript: June 5, 2002
Revised Manuscript: July 16, 2002
Published: July 29, 2002

Citation
Roman Kuranov, V. Sapozhnikova, I. Turchin, E. Zagainova, V. Gelikonov, V. Kamensky, L. Snopova, and N. Prodanetz, "Complementary use of cross-polarization and standard OCT for differential diagnosis of pathological tissues," Opt. Express 10, 707-713 (2002)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-10-15-707


Sort:  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. D. Huang, J. Wang, C.P. Lin, J. S. Shuman, W.G. Stinson, W. Chang, M.R. Hee, T. Flotte, K. Gregory, C.A. Puliafito, and J.G. Fujimoto, "Optical coherence tomography," Science 254, 1178-1181, (1991). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. V.M. Gelikonov, G.V. Gelikonov, R.V. Kuranov, K.I. Pravdenko, A.M. Sergeev, F.I. Feldchtein, Ya.I. Khanin, D.V. Shabanov, N.D. Gladkova, N.K. Nikulin, G.A. Petrova, and V.V. Pochinko, "Coherent optical tomography of microscopic inhomogeneties in biological tissues," JETP Lett. 61, 158-162, (1995).
  3. J.M. Schmitt, ???Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT): A Review,??? IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1205-1215, (1999). [CrossRef]
  4. N.M. Shakhova, V.M. Gelikonov, V.A. Kamensky, R.V. Kuranov, and I.V. Turchin, ???Clinical aspects of the endoscopic optical coherence tomography and the ways for improving its diagnostic value,??? Laser Phys. 12, 617-626, (2002).
  5. M.E. Brezinski, J.G. Fujimoto, ???Optical Coherence Tomography: High-Resolution Imaging in Nontransparent Tissue,??? IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1185-1192, (1999). [CrossRef]
  6. C. Pitris, C. Jesser, S.A. Boppart, D. Stemper, M.E. Brezinski, J.G. Fujimoto, ???Feasibility of optical coherence tomography for high-resolution imaging of human gastrointestinal tract malignancies,??? J. Gastroenterol. 35, 87-92, (2000). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. N.D. Gladkova, G.A. Petrova, N.K. Nikulin, S.G. Radenska-Lopovok, L.B. Snopova,. V.A. Nasonova, G.V. Gelikonov, V.M Gelikonov, R.V. Kuranov, A.M. Sergeev, F.I. Feldchtein,???In vivo optical coherence tomography imaging of human skin: norm and pathology,??? Skin Research and Technology 6, 6-16, (2000). [CrossRef]
  8. F.I. Feldchtein, G.V. Gelikonov, V.M. Gelikonov, R.R. Iksanov, R.V. Kuranov, A.M. Sergeev, N.D. Gladkova, M.N. Ourutina, J.A. Warren., D.H. Reitze, ???In vivo imaging of hard and soft tissue of the oral cavity,??? Opt. Express 3, 239-250, (1998), <a href="http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-239">http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-239</a>. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. A.V. Shakhov, A.B. Terentjeva, V.A. Kamensky, L.B. Snopova, V.M. Gelikonov, F.I. Feldchtein, A.M. Sergeev, ???Optical Coherence Tomography Monitoring for Laser Surgery of Laryngeal Carcinoma,??? J. Surg. Oncology 77, 253-259, (2001). [CrossRef]
  10. G. Zuccaro, N.D. Gladkova, J. Vargo, F.I. Feldchtein, E.V. Zagaynova, D. Conwell, G.W. Falk, J.R. Goldblum, J. Dumot, J. Ponsky, G.V. Gelikonov, B. Davros, E. Donchenko, J.E. Richter, ???Optical coherence tomography of the esophagus and proximal stomach in health and disease,??? Am. J. Gastroenter. 96, 2633-2639, (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. E.V. Zagaynova, O.S. Streltsova, N.D. Gladkova, L.B. Snopova, G.V. Gelikonov, F.I. Feldchtein, A.N. Morozov, ???In vivo optical coherence tomography feasibility for bladder disease,??? J. Urology 167, 1492-1496, (2002). [CrossRef]
  12. S.L. Jacques, J.R. Roman, K. Lee, ???Imaging superficial tissues with polarized light,??? Lasers Sur. Med. 26, 119-129, (2000). [CrossRef]
  13. D.J. Maitland, J.T. Jr Walsh, ???Quantitative measurements of linear birefringence during heating of native collagen,??? Lasers Sur. Med. 20, 310-318, (1997). [CrossRef]
  14. K. Schoenenberger, B.W. Colston, Jr., D.J. Maitland, L.B. DaSilva, and M.J. Everett, ???Mapping of birefringence and thermal damage in tissue by use of polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography,??? Appl. Opt. 37, 6026-6036, (1998). [CrossRef]
  15. J.F. de Boer, S.M. Srinivas, A. Malekafzali, Z.P. Chen; J.S. Nelson, ???Imaging thermally damaged tissue by polarization sensitive optical coherence tomography,??? Opt. Express 3, 212-218, (1998), <a href="http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-212">http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-3-6-212</a>. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. J.F. de Boer, S.M. Srinivas, B.H. Park, T.H. Pham, Z.P. Chen, T.E. Milner, J.S. Nelson, ???Polarization effects in optical coherence tomography of various biological tissues,??? IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 5, 1200-1204, (1999). [CrossRef]
  17. A. Baumgartner, S. Dichtl, C.K. Hitzenberger, H. Sattmann, B. Robl, A. Moritz, Z.F. Fercher, W. Sperr, ???Polarization-sensitive optical coherence tomography of dental structures,??? Caries Research 34, 59-69, (2000). [CrossRef]
  18. W. Drexler, D. Stamper, C. Jesser, X.D. Li, C. Pitris, K. Saunders, S. Martin, M.B. Lodge, J.G. Fujimoto, M.E. Brezinski, ???Correlation of collagen organization with polarization sensitive imaging of in vitro cartilage: Implications for osteoarthritis,??? J. Rheumatol. 28, 1311-1318, (2001). [PubMed]
  19. J.M. Schmitt, S.H. Xiang, ???Cross-polarized backscatter in optical coherence tomography of biological tissue,??? Opt. Lett. 23, 1060-1062, (1998). [CrossRef]
  20. R.V. Kuranov, V.M. Gelikonov, A.V. Shakhov, A.B. Terentyeva, I.V. Turchin and V.A. Kamensky, ???Mapping depolarization properties of biotissues for increasing specificity of OCT,??? in OSA Biomed. Top. Meeting, OSA Tech. Digest, (Optical Society of America, Washington DC, 2002), pp.275-277.
  21. V.M. Gelikonov, D.D. Gusovskii, V.I. Leonov, M.A. Novikov, ???Birefringence compensation in single-mode optical fibers,??? Sov. Tech. Phys. Lett. 13, 322-323, (1987).
  22. R.D. Lillie, Histopathologic technic and practical histochemistry (McGraw-Hill book company, New York-Toronto-Sydney-London, 1965), Chap. 15, or <a href="http://www.ebsciences.com/staining/van_gies.htm">http://www.ebsciences.com/staining/van_gies.htm</a>.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited