4.5 Article

Detection and diagnosis of oral neoplasia with an optical coherence microscope

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL OPTICS
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages 1271-1280

Publisher

SPIE-SOC PHOTO-OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1117/1.1805558

Keywords

optical imaging; optical coherence microscopy; oral dysplasia; amelanotic tissue; squamous cell carcinoma

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA082880, 1 R01 CA 82880-01, R01 CA095604-05A2, R01 CA095604] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of high resolution, in vivo optical imaging may offer a clinically useful adjunct to standard histopathologic techniques. A pilot study was performed to investigate the diagnostic capabilities of optical coherence microscopy (OCM) to discriminate between normal and abnormal oral tissue. Our objective is to determine whether OCM, a technique combining the sulocellular resolution of confocal microscopy with the coherence gating and heterodyne detection of optical coherence tomography, has the same ability as confocal microscopy to detect morphological changes present in precancers of the epithelium while providing superior penetration depths. We report our results using OCM to characterize the features of normal and neoplastic oral mucosa excised from 13 subjects. Specifically, we use optical coherence and confocal microscopic images obtained from human oral biopsy specimens at various depths from the mucosal surface to examine the optical properties that distinguish normal and neoplastic oral mucosa. An analysis of penetration depths achieved by the OCM and its associated confocal arm found that the OCM consistently imaged more deeply. Extraction of scattering coefficients from reflected nuclear intensity is successful in nonhyperkeratotic layers and shows differentiation between scattering properties of normal and dysplastic epithelium and invasive cancer. (C) 2004 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available