title: Effects of probe geometry on transscleral diffuse optical spectroscopy.
abstract: The purpose of this study was to investigate how the geometry of a fiber optic probe affects the transmission and reflection of light through the scleral eye wall. Two geometrical parameters of the fiber probe were investigated: the source-detector distance and the fiber protrusion, i.e. the length of the fiber extending from the flat surface of the fiber probe. For optimization of the fiber optic probe geometry, fluorescence stained choroidal tumor phantoms in ex vivo porcine eyes were measured with both diffuse reflectance- and laser-induced fluorescence spectroscopy. The strength of the fluorescence signal compared to the excitation signal was used as a measure for optimization. Intraocular pressure (IOP) and temperature were monitored to assess the impact of the probe on the eye. For visualizing any possible damage caused by the probe, the scleral surface was imaged with scanning electron microscopy after completion of the spectroscopic measurements. A source-detector distance of 5 mm with zero fiber protrusion was considered optimal in terms of spectroscopic contrast, however, a slight fiber protrusion of 0.5 mm is argued to be advantageous for clinical measurements. The study further indicates that transscleral spectroscopy can be safely performed in human eyes under in vivo conditions, without leading to an unacceptable IOP elevation, a significant rise in tissue temperature, or any visible damage to the scleral surface.
authors.forename: Pontus
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Svenmarker
authors.forename: Can T
authors.initials: CT
authors.lastname: Xu
authors.forename: Stefan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Andersson-Engels
authors.forename: Jørgen
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Krohn
references.citation: Exp Eye Res. 2010 Feb;90(2):277-84
references.pmid: 19900442
references.citation: Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 1999 Sep;215(3):186-96
references.pmid: 10528285
references.citation: Acta Ophthalmol. 2012 Jun;90(4):350-6
references.pmid: 21155981
references.citation: Rep Prog Phys. 2010 Jul;73(7):
references.pmid: 26120204
references.citation: Am J Ophthalmol. 1998 Feb;125(2):237-41
references.pmid: 9467451
references.citation: Appl Opt. 1995 Jan 1;34(1):22-30
references.pmid: 20963080
references.citation: Retina. 2005 Sep;25(6):767-71
references.pmid: 16141866
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 1995 Jun;40(6):963-78
references.pmid: 7659735
references.citation: Opt Lett. 2003 Jan 15;28(2):120-2
references.pmid: 12656504
references.citation: Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2009 Feb;20(1):119-31
references.pmid: 19268567
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2001 Apr;108(4):660-5
references.pmid: 11297479
references.citation: J Biomed Opt. 2006 Jul-Aug;11(4):041102
references.pmid: 16965130
references.citation: Eye (Lond). 2002 Jul;16(4):325-46
references.pmid: 12101438
references.citation: Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998 Oct;76(5):521-7
references.pmid: 9826032
references.citation: Exp Eye Res. 2010 Feb;90(2):330-6
references.pmid: 19941854
references.citation: Ophthalmology. 2008 Apr;115(4):667-72
references.pmid: 17716733
references.citation: Appl Opt. 2003 Aug 1;42(22):4612-20
references.pmid: 12916630
references.citation: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002 Aug;43(8):2529-32
references.pmid: 12147580
references.citation: Opt Express. 2008 Mar 17;16(6):4250-62
references.pmid: 18542520
references.citation: Eye (Lond). 2008 Nov;22(11):1398-403
references.pmid: 17585309
references.citation: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Nov;47(11):4819-26
references.pmid: 17065493
references.citation: J Biomed Opt. 2009 Jan-Feb;14(1):014027
references.pmid: 19256715
references.citation: J Biomed Opt. 2003 Apr;8(2):237-47
references.pmid: 12683849
references.citation: J Biomed Opt. 2008 Jul-Aug;13(4):041302
references.pmid: 19021310
references.citation: J Invest Dermatol. 1985 Jul;85(1):38-42
references.pmid: 4008975