title: Measurement of fluorophore concentrations and fluorescence quantum yield in tissue-simulating phantoms using three diffusion models of steady-state spatially resolved fluorescence.
abstract: Steady-state diffusion theory models of fluorescence in tissue have been investigated for recovering fluorophore concentrations and fluorescence quantum yield. Spatially resolved fluorescence, excitation and emission reflectance Carlo simulations, and measured using a multi-fibre probe on tissue-simulating phantoms containing either aluminium phthalocyanine tetrasulfonate (AlPcS4), Photofrin meso-tetra-(4-sulfonatophenyl)-porphine dihydrochloride The accuracy of the fluorophore concentration and fluorescence quantum yield recovered by three different models of spatially resolved fluorescence were compared. The models were based on: (a) weighted difference of the excitation and emission reflectance, (b) fluorescence due to a point excitation source or (c) fluorescence due to a pencil beam excitation source. When literature values for the fluorescence quantum yield were used for each of the fluorophores, the fluorophore absorption coefficient (and hence concentration) at the excitation wavelength (mu(a,x,f)) was recovered with a root-mean-square accuracy of 11.4% using the point source model of fluorescence and 8.0% using the more complicated pencil beam excitation model. The accuracy was calculated over a broad range of optical properties and fluorophore concentrations. The weighted difference of reflectance model performed poorly, with a root-mean-square error in concentration of about 50%. Monte Carlo simulations suggest that there are some situations where the weighted difference of reflectance is as accurate as the other two models, although this was not confirmed experimentally. Estimates of the fluorescence quantum yield in multiple scattering media were also made by determining mu(a,x,f) independently from the fitted absorption spectrum and applying the various diffusion theory models. The fluorescence quantum yields for AlPcS4 and TPPS4 were calculated to be 0.59 +/- 0.03 and 0.121 +/- 0.001 respectively using the point source model, and 0.63 +/- 0.03 and 0.129 +/- 0.002 using the pencil beam excitation model. These results are consistent with published values.
authors.affiliation: Department of Medical Physics, Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, 699 Concession Street, Hamilton, Ontario L8V 5C2, Canada.
authors.forename: Kevin R
authors.initials: KR
authors.lastname: Diamond
authors.forename: Thomas J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Farrell
authors.forename: Michael S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Patterson
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D003198:Computer Simulation; D003238:Connective Tissue / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000378:metabolism; D004058:Diffusion; D017323:Dihematoporphyrin Ether / Q000032:analysis / Q000737:chemistry; D005456:Fluorescent Dyes / Q000032:analysis* / Q000737:chemistry; D008856:Microscopy, Fluorescence / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D008956:Models, Chemical; D019047:Phantoms, Imaging; D011166:Porphyrins / Q000032:analysis / Q000737:chemistry; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013050:Spectrometry, Fluorescence / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*
chemical_list: D005456:Fluorescent Dyes; D011166:Porphyrins; C016136:tetraphenylporphine sulfonate; D017323:Dihematoporphyrin Ether