Comparison of pulsed photothermal radiometry, optical coherence tomography and ultrasound for melanoma thickness measurement in PDMS tissue phantoms

Abstract

Melanoma accounts for 75% of all skin cancer deaths. Pulsed photothermal radiometry (PPTR), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and ultrasound (US) are non-invasive imaging techniques that may be used to measure melanoma thickness, thus, determining surgical margins. We constructed a series of PDMS tissue phantoms simulating melanomas of different thicknesses. PPTR, OCT and US measurements were recorded from PDMS tissue phantoms and results were compared in terms of axial imaging range, axial resolution and imaging time. A Monte Carlo simulation and three-dimensional heat transfer model was constructed to simulate PPTR measurement. Experimental results show that PPTR and US can provide a wide axial imaging range (75 μm-1.7 mm and 120-910 μm respectively) but poor axial resolution (75 and 120 μm respectively) in PDMS tissue phantoms, while OCT has the most superficial axial imaging range (14-450 μm) but highest axial resolution (14 μm). The Monte Carlo simulation and three-dimensional heat transfer model give good agreement with PPTR measurement. PPTR and US are suited to measure thicker melanoma lesions (>400 μm), while OCT is better to measure thin melanoma lesions (<400 μm).

Three-dimensional, distendable bladder phantom for optical coherence tomography and white light cystoscopy

“…We also enumerate the nuances of applying certain known fabrication techniques-such as spin coating 18 -to contexts (e.g., nonplanar, 3-D shapes) that are essential to establish their generalizability and limitations. The fabrication process we described has broad applicability and can be generalized to conceive OCT phantoms for other kinds of tissues [26][27][28][29] or phantoms for other imaging modalities.…”

Assessment of Tumor Thickness in Melanocytic Skin Lesions: Comparison of Optical Coherence Tomography, 20-MHz Ultrasound and Histopathology

“…Gambichler et al [3] compared tumor thickness measurements of thin melanocytic skin lesions assessed by 20- and 100-MHz ultrasounds and reported a superior performance of the 100-MHz ultrasound, although both methods showed a tendency toward overestimation, with narrower limits of agreement for 100-MHz ultrasound imaging. In a very recent investigation, pulsed photothermal radiometry (PPTR), OCT, and HFUS were used as noninvasive imaging techniques to measure melanoma thickness in tissue phantoms [22]. The authors could clearly demonstrate that PPTR and HFUS were suited to measuring thicker melanomas, whereas OCT was better for measuring thin melanomas due to its mostly superficial axial imaging range (14–450 µm) and higher axial resolution (14 µm).…”

Determination of Melanoma Lateral and Depth Margins: Potential for Treatment Planning and Five-Year Survival Rate

“…Because the interfaces between tissues have different acoustic impedances and, therefore, different reflectivities, the received US signal contains boundary information of tissue with different elastic properties (T. Wang et al, 2011). US frequencies of 7.5-15 MHz are routinely used to visualize subcutaneous structures deeper than 1.5 cm including muscles, tendons, vessels and internal organs to identify pathologies or lesions (Aaslid et al, 2010;Shia et al, 2007;Tuzcu et al, 2010 does not allow precise measurement of tissues due to insufficient spatial resolution (Ulrich et al, 1999).…”

“…Heat generated as (Milanič et al, 2007;Milner et al, 1996), including blood vessels in port wine stain (PWS) birthmarks in human skin (Li et al, 2004). Because different chromophore thicknesses can provide different laser induced initial temperature profiles and eventually produce different radiometric temperatures (T. , the authors proposed that relationship between CMM thickness and detected radiometric temperature increase can be determined using PPTR in tissue phantoms mimicking CMM thicknesses from 120 µm to 2.8 mm (Figure 9) with a penetration depth of 1.7 mm and axial resolution of 75 µm (T. Wang et al, 2011). However, further studies are needed to investigate the capability of PPTR in CMM thickness measurement in skin in vivo.…”