2013
DOI: 10.1117/1.jbo.18.6.066006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimizing the performance of dual-axis confocal microscopes via Monte-Carlo scattering simulations and diffraction theory

Abstract: Abstract. Dual-axis confocal (DAC) microscopy has been found to exhibit superior rejection of out-of-focus and multiply scattered background light compared to conventional single-axis confocal microscopy. DAC microscopes rely on the use of separated illumination and collection beam paths that focus and intersect at a single focal volume (voxel) within tissue. While it is generally recognized that the resolution and contrast of a DAC microscope depends on both the crossing angle of the DAC beams, 2θ, and the fo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to diffraction theory, the FWHM width of the focal line in tissues is 1.4 μm. 32 Thus, we were sampling the x-direction at approximately the Nyquist frequency.…”
Section: Video-rate Line-scanned Dual-axis Confocalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to diffraction theory, the FWHM width of the focal line in tissues is 1.4 μm. 32 Thus, we were sampling the x-direction at approximately the Nyquist frequency.…”
Section: Video-rate Line-scanned Dual-axis Confocalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While ms2/LCI sought to use multiple scattering for imaging, other off-axis configurations have been developed to better separate ballistic and multiply scattered components of backscattered light [4, 5]. In dual-axis confocal microscopy, objectives with NA = 0.1–0.2 are used for illumination and detection with large offset angles (25–30°) between the two to create tight spatial gating for the rejection of out-of-focus background with improved depth of field [6, 7]. For interferometric techniques, low NA beams (NA < 0.02) with lower offset angles (3–4 °) can be used instead to create a larger imaging range for deep tissue imaging, because coherence gating is independent of NA and thus still provides diffuse background rejection [2].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While larger crossing angles may improve the rejection of out-of-focus background [6], tighter spatial rejection will lead to a smaller imaging range, which is undesirable for deep imaging. Besides, larger offset angles also lead to greater signal attenuation due to longer photon paths within the tissue.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The DAC architecture differs from a conventional confocal architecture (hereby referred to as a single-axis confocal, or SAC) in that the illumination and collection paths do not overlap except at the focus. From diffraction-theory-based calculations as well as Monte-Carlo scattering simulations performed previously [14, 1618] , the DAC microscope has been shown to possess superior optical-sectioning capabilities in comparison to SAC microscopes, resulting in increased contrast and imaging depth.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The software utilizes a Henyey-Greenstein approximation of Mie scattering theory and does not take into consideration diffraction, absorption, polarization, or beam steering events introduced by the heterogeneities inherent to real tissue. However, these simulations have been shown to provide an excellent first-order approximation of confocal microscope performance in homogeneous scattering media [17, 18] .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%