Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Feb;27(7):074713.
doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.27.7.074713.

Reproducibility of identical solid phantoms

Fangzhou Zhao  1   2 , Pietro Levoni  1 , Lorenzo Frabasile  1 , Hong Qi  2 , Michele Lacerenza  1 , Pranav Lanka  1 , Alessandro Torricelli  1   3 , Antonio Pifferi  1   3 , Rinaldo Cubeddu  1 , Lorenzo Spinelli  3
Affiliations

Reproducibility of identical solid phantoms

Fangzhou Zhao et al. J Biomed Opt. 2022 Feb.

Abstract

Significance: Tissue-like solid phantoms with identical optical properties, known within tolerant uncertainty, are of crucial importance in diffuse optics for instrumentation assessment, interlaboratory comparison studies, industrial standards, and multicentric clinical trials.

Aim: The reproducibility in fabrication of homogeneous solid phantoms is focused based on spectra measurements by instrument comparisons grounded on the time-resolved diffuse optics.

Approach: Epoxy-resin and silicone phantoms are considered as matrices and both employ three different instruments for time-resolved diffuse spectroscopy within the spectral range of 540 to 1100 nm. In particular, we fabricated two batches of five phantoms each in epoxy resin and silicone. Then, we evaluated the intra- and interbatch variability with respect to the instrument precision, by considering the coefficient of variation (CV) of absorption and reduced scattering coefficients.

Results: We observed a similar precision for the three instruments, within 2% for repeated measurements on the same phantom. For epoxy-resin phantoms, the intra- and the interbatch variability reached the instrument precision limit, demonstrating a very good phantom reproducibility. For the silicone phantoms, we observed larger values for intra- and interbatch variability. In particular, at worst, for reduced scattering coefficient interbatch CV was about 5%.

Conclusions: Results suggest that the fabrication of solid phantoms, especially considering epoxy-resin matrix, is highly reproducible, even if they come from different batch fabrications and are measured using different instruments.

Keywords: instrument comparison; phantom reproducibility; time-resolved diffuse optics; tissue-like solid phantoms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic of the DOS instrument.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schematic of the PHOOD instrument.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Schematic of the NIRSBOX instrument.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mean absorption coefficient, panels (a) and (c) and reduced scattering coefficient, panels (b) and (d), as a function of wavelength for phantom 1 of the two epoxy-resin batches. Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Mean absorption coefficient, panels (a) and (c) and reduced scattering coefficient, panels (b) and (d), as a function of wavelength for phantom 1 of the two silicone batches. Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Precision of the three instruments as a function of the wavelength, for absorption coefficient, panels (a) and (c) and reduced scattering coefficient, panels (b) and (d) is reported. Panels (a) and (b) and panels (c) and (d) refer to epoxy-resin and silicone phantoms, respectively.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Intrabatch CV for the epoxy-resin phantoms, as a function of the wavelength, for absorption coefficient, panel (a) and reduced scattering coefficient, panel (b). Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Interbatch CV for epoxy-resin phantoms, as a function of the wavelength, for absorption coefficient, panel (a) and reduced scattering coefficient, panel (b). Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Intrabatch CV for silicone phantoms, as a function of the wavelength, for absorption coefficient, panel (a) and reduced scattering coefficient, panel (b). Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Interbatch CV for silicone phantoms, as a function of the wavelength, for absorption coefficient, panel (a) and reduced scattering coefficient, panel (b). Results obtained employing the three measurement systems are shown.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gibson A., Dehghani H., “Diffuse optical imaging,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A: Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 367(1900), 3055–3072 (2009).10.1098/rsta.2009.0080 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Durduran T., et al. , “Diffuse optics for tissue monitoring and tomography,” Rep. Prog. Phys. 73(7), 076701 (2010).RPPHAG10.1088/0034-4885/73/7/076701 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jbsis F., “Noninvasive, infrared monitoring of cerebral and myocardial oxygen sufficiency and circulatory parameters,” Science 198(4323), 1264–1266 (1977).SCIEAS10.1126/science.929199 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cubeddu R., et al. , “Time-resolved reflectance: a systematic study for application to the optical characterization of tissues,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 30(10), 2421–2430 (1994).IEJQA710.1109/3.328616 - DOI
    1. Yodh A., Chance B., “Spectroscopy and imaging with diffusing light,” Phys. Today 48(3), 34–40 (1995).PHTOAD10.1063/1.881445 - DOI

Publication types