Fig. 1. Flow chart of proposed algorithm
Fig. 2. Simulation models. (a) Heterogeneous digi-mouse model; (b) front view of discretized mesh of mouse torso; (c) back view of the discretized mesh
Fig. 3. Reconstruction results of single source in liver (all BLT results are normalized intensity). (a) 3D rendering of true source distribution; (b1)-(b3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of true source overlapped with CT images; (c) 3D rendering of BSBL reconstruction result; (d1)-(d3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of BSBL reconstruction result overlapped with CT images; (e) 3D rendering of L1-LS reconstruction result; (f1)-(f3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of L1-LS reconstru
Fig. 4. Comparison of evaluation parameters of simulated results. (a) Comparison of 3D COM offset of reconstructed resource; (b) comparison of Dice coefficient between reconstructed and true sources; (c) comparison of αCNR of reconstructed image
Fig. 5. Reconstruction results of single source in kidney (all BLT results are normalized intensity). (a) 3D rendering of true source distribution; (b1)-(b3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of true source overlapped with CT images; (c) 3D rendering of BSBL reconstruction result; (d1)-(d3) three views of BSBL reconstruction result overlapped with CT images; (e) 3D rendering of L1-LS reconstruction result; (f1)-(f3) three views of L1-LS reconstruction result overlapped with CT images
Fig. 6. Reconstruction results of single source in abdomen (all BLT results are normalized intensity). (a) 3D rendering of true source distribution; (b1)-(b3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of true source overlapped with CT images; (c) 3D rendering of BSBL reconstruction result; (d1)-(d3) three views of BSBL reconstruction result overlapped with CT images; (e) 3D rendering of L1-LS reconstruction result; (f1)-(f3) three views of L1-LS reconstruction result overlapped with CT images
Fig. 7. Reconstruction results of double sources in lungs (all BLT results are normalized intensity). (a) 3D rendering of true source distribution; (b1) (b2) transverse and coronal views of true left source overlapped with CT images; (b3)(b4) transverse and coronal views of true right source; (c) 3D rendering of BSBL reconstruction result; (d1)(d2) transverse and coronal views of left source overlapped with CT images using BSBL method; (d3)(d4) transverse and coronal views of right source using BSBL met
Fig. 8. Normalized source intensity on line AB. (a) Schematic of line AB across single source; (b) schematic of line AB across double sources; (c) normalization curve for case1; (d) normalization curve for case2; (e) normalization curve for case3; (f) normalization curve for case4
Fig. 9. Reconstruction results of mouse experiment (all BLT results are normalized intensity). (a) Surface optical signals collected in experiment; (b) surface optical signal distribution on discrete grids; (c) 3D rendering of BSBL reconstruction result; (d1)-(d3) rransverse, coronal and sagittal views of BSBL reconstruction result overlapped with CT images; (e) 3D rendering of L1-LS reconstruction result; (f1)-(f3) transverse, coronal and sagittal views of L1-LS reconstruction result overlapped with CT
Optical parameter | μa /nm-1 | μ'/nm-1 |
---|
590 nm | 610 nm | 630 mn | 650 nm | | 590 nm | 610 nm | 630 nm | 650 nm |
---|
Heart | 0.4829 | 0.0944 | 0.0473 | 1.0100 | 1.16 | 1.10 | 1.05 | 0.0329 | Lungs | 1.3358 | 0.2187 | 0.1048 | 0.0712 | 2.33 | 2.28 | 2.25 | 2.2100 | Liver | 2.8969 | 0.5656 | 0.2828 | 0.1968 | 0.77 | 0.75 | 0.72 | 0.7000 | Kidney | 0.5409 | 0.1058 | 0.0530 | 0.0370 | 2.73 | 2.60 | 2.47 | 2.3600 | Skeleton | 0.4547 | 0.0819 | 0.0402 | 0.0277 | 3.01 | 2.86 | 2.73 | 2.6100 | Soft tissuea | 0.0332 | 0.0071 | 0.0037 | 0.0026 | 1.53 | 1.46 | 1.40 | 1.3500 | Notes: aμa is chosen from adipose tissue in Ref. [36]. μ's is calculated from Eq. (1) and Table 2 in Ref. [4]. | |
|
Table 1. Optical parameters of different regions under four wavelengths[4,36]
Case | Center of true source | Algorithm | COM of reconstruction source | /mm | Dice | αCNR |
---|
Case1 | (19.9,49.3,7.7) | L1-LS | (19.8,49.3,7.8) | 0.2 | 0.17 | 9.9 | BSBL | (19.9,49.1,8.0) | 0.3 | 0.79 | 311.2 | Case2 | (26.9,39.7,14.7) | L1-LS | (26.4,39.6,14.5) | 0.5 | 0.32 | 41.4 | BSBL | (26.7,39.7,14.5) | 0.3 | 0.54 | 5199.4 | Case3 | (28.3,36.0,9.2) | L1-LS | (27.8,36.8,9.7) | 1.1 | 0.08 | 9.3 | BSBL | (28.2,36.0,9.3) | 0.2 | 0.65 | 1778.8 | Case4 | (16.8,56.9,13.0) | L1-LS | (16.7,57.2,12.8) | 0.4 | 0.36 | 21.2 | (23.5,57.3,11.2) | | 0.5 | (23.2,56.9,11.0) | BSBL | (16.7,56.7,13.0) | 0.2 | 0.69 | 404.2 | (23.2,56.8,11.0) | | 0.2 |
|
Table 2. Comparison of simulated reconstruction results