4.6 Article

Experimental Characterization of Spurious Signals in Magnetic Nanoparticles Enhanced Microwave Imaging of Cancer

期刊

SENSORS
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s21082820

关键词

instrumental drift; magnetic nanoparticles; microwave imaging; scattering parameters; spurious magnetic effects

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The magnetic nanoparticles enhanced microwave imaging technique relies on modulating the response of nanocomponents with a polarizing magnetic field for tumor detection. However, spurious effects from instrumental drift and magnetic field interaction need to be minimized for accurate imaging. Experimental assessment in this paper provides design guidelines to mitigate unwanted magnetic effects and instrumental drift for optimal imaging conditions.
Magnetic nanoparticles enhanced microwave imaging relies on the capability of modulating the response of such nanocomponents at microwaves by means of a (low frequency) polarizing magnetic field. In medical imaging, this capability allows for the detection and imaging of tumors loaded with nanoparticles. As the useful signal is the one which arises from nanoparticles, it is crucial to remove sources of undesired disturbance to enable the diagnosis of early-stage tumors. In particular, spurious signals arise from instrumental drift, as well as from the unavoidable interaction between the polarizing field and the imaging system. In this paper, we experimentally assess and characterize such spurious effects in order to set the optimal working conditions for magnetic nanoparticles enhanced microwave imaging of cancer. To this end, simple test devices, which include all components typically comprised in a microwave imaging system, have been realized and exploited. The experiment's results allow us to derive design formulas and guidelines useful for limiting the impact of unwanted magnetic effects, as well as that relative to the instrumental drift on the signal generated by the magnetic nanoparticles-loaded tumor.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据