Singular value decomposition metrics show limitations of detector design in diffuse fluorescence tomography

The spatial resolution and recovered contrast of images reconstructed from diffuse fluorescence tomography data are limited by the high scattering properties of light propagation in biological tissue. As a result, the image reconstruction process can be exceedingly vulnerable to inaccurate prior knowledge of tissue optical properties and stochastic noise. In light of these limitations, the optimal source-detector geometry for a fluorescence tomography system is non-trivial, requiring analytical methods to guide design. Analysis of the singular value decomposition of the matrix to be inverted for image reconstruction is one potential approach, providing key quantitative metrics, such as singular image mode spatial resolution and singular data mode frequency as a function of singular mode. In the present study, these metrics are used to analyze the effects of different sources of noise and model errors as related to image quality in the form of spatial resolution and contrast recovery. The image quality is demonstrated to be inherently noise-limited even when detection geometries were increased in complexity to allow maximal tissue sampling, suggesting that detection noise characteristics outweigh detection geometry for achieving optimal reconstructions.

[1]  Scott C Davis,et al.  Pre-clinical whole-body fluorescence imaging: Review of instruments, methods and applications. , 2010, Journal of photochemistry and photobiology. B, Biology.

[2]  Per Christian Hansen,et al.  Rank-Deficient and Discrete Ill-Posed Problems , 1996 .

[3]  R. Weissleder,et al.  Charge-coupled-device based scanner for tomography of fluorescent near-infrared probes in turbid media. , 2002, Medical physics.

[4]  Hamid Dehghani,et al.  Imaging of glioma tumor with endogenous fluorescence tomography. , 2009, Journal of biomedical optics.

[5]  Venkataramanan Krishnaswamy,et al.  Radiologic and near-infrared/optical spectroscopic imaging: where is the synergy? , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  Vasilis Ntziachristos,et al.  Singular-value analysis and optimization of experimental parameters in fluorescence molecular tomography. , 2004, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[7]  R. Weissleder,et al.  Experimental three-dimensional fluorescence reconstruction of diffuse media by use of a normalized Born approximation. , 2001, Optics letters.

[8]  J P Culver,et al.  Optimization of optode arrangements for diffuse optical tomography: A singular-value analysis. , 2001, Optics letters.

[9]  Hamid Dehghani,et al.  A microcomputed tomography guided fluorescence tomography system for small animal molecular imaging. , 2009, The Review of scientific instruments.

[10]  Hamid Dehghani,et al.  Contrast-detail analysis characterizing diffuse optical fluorescence tomography image reconstruction. , 2005, Journal of biomedical optics.

[11]  Vasilis Ntziachristos,et al.  Optimization of 360° projection fluorescence molecular tomography , 2007, Medical Image Anal..

[12]  Hamid Dehghani,et al.  Early-photon fluorescence tomography: spatial resolution improvements and noise stability considerations. , 2009, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.