4.5 Article

Fluorescence spectroscopy as a highly potential single-entity tool to identify chromophores and fluorophores: study on neoplastic human brain lesions

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL OPTICS
卷 18, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

SPIE-SOC PHOTO-OPTICAL INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.18.6.067002

关键词

brain tumor; optical diagnosis; endogenous fluorophores; collagen; flavin adenine dinucleotide; hemoglobin; porphyrin; linear discriminant analysis

资金

  1. Board of Research in Nuclear Sciences, Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India
  2. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fluorescence and diffuse reflectance spectroscopy are powerful tools to differentiate normal and malignant tissue based on the emissions from endogenous fluorophores and diffuse reflection of absorbers such as hemoglobin. However, separate analytical methods are used for the identification of fluorophores and hemoglobin. The estimation of fluorophores and hemoglobin simultaneously using a single technique of autofluorescence spectroscopy is reported, and its diagnostic potential on clinical tissue samples is potentially exploited. Surgically removed brain tissues from patients that are later identified pathologically as astrocytoma, glioma, meningioma, and schwannoma are studied. The emissions from prominent fluorophores collagen, flavin adenine dinucleotide, phospholipids, and porphyrin are analyzed at 320 and 410 nm excitations. The hemoglobin concentration is also calculated from the ratio of fluorescence emissions at 500 and 570 nm. A better classification of normal and tumor tissues is yielded for 410 nm excitation compared to 320 nm when diagnostic algorithm based on linear discriminant analysis is used. The potential of fluorescence spectroscopy as a single entity to evaluate the prominent fluorophores as well as the hemoglobin concentration within normal and tumor brain tissues is emphasized. (C) 2013 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE)

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

4.5
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