
5.5 Diffuse Optical Tomography (DOT) and Photon Migration 101
[384, 386]. When used for adult brain imaging, the detectors opposite to the
source do not detect reasonable signals. Therefore detectors and sources are ar-
ranged at only side of the head. The configuration can be considered a subset of
the arrangement shown in Fig. 5.43, left.
The setup shown in Fig. 5.43, middle, uses a scanning technique. Several lasers
of different wavelength are multiplexed into a single optical source. The light
source and the detector (or a number of detectors) scan simultaneously across the
sample. The scanning technique is successfully used for optical mammography
[124, 200, 201, 203, 412, 489, 490, 505, 506]. A scanning setup for small-animal
imaging is described in [174]. The benefit of scanning is that it obtains a high
spatial density of data points. Therefore the Nyquist condition can be fulfilled for
both spatial dimensions, and image artefacts are avoided. However, problems can
arise from edge effects. Not only can the detectors be damaged if the scan runs
over the edge of the sample, but also the reconstruction of the sample properties
has to cope with different photon migration near the edge [525].
The setup shown in Fig. 5.43, right, uses a time-resolved camera system for de-
tection. The camera uses a gated [125, 149] or modulated [460, 496] image inten-
sifier. The source is scanned across the sample, and for each source position a
sequence of images is taken at various gate delays or at several phase angles.
Optical tomography techniques for human medicine are currently at the stage of
clinical tests [204, 225, 489, 490]. Frequency domain instruments using modula-
tion techniques are competing with time-domain instruments using TCSPC.
A comprehensive overview of frequency-domain DOT techniques is given in
[88]. Particular instruments are described in [166, 347, 410]. It is commonly be-
lieved that modulation techniques are less expensive and achieve shorter acquisi-
tion times, whereas TCSPC delivers a better absolute accuracy of optical tissue
properties. It must be doubted that this general statement is correct for any particu-
lar instrument. Certainly, relatively inexpensive frequency-domain instruments
can be built by using sine-wave-modulated LEDs, standard avalanche photodi-
odes, and radio or cellphone receiver chips. Instruments of this type usually have a
considerable „amplitude-phase crosstalk“. Amplitude-phase crosstalk is a depend-
ence of the measured phase on the amplitude of the signal. It results from nonlin-
earity in the detectors, amplifiers, and mixers, and from synchronous signal pickup
[6]. This makes it difficult to obtain absolute optical tissue properties. A carefully
designed system [382] reached a systematic phase error of 0.5° at 100 MHz. A
system that compensates the amplitude-phase crosstalk via a reference channel
reached an RMS phase error of 0.2° at 100 MHz [370]. These phase errors corre-
spond to a time shift of 14 ps and 5.5 ps RMS, respectively.
Amplitude-phase crosstalk is intrinsically low in frequency-domain instruments
that use gain-modulated PMTs as detectors and mixers [166]. Results presented in
[98, 346] show that optical properties can be obtained with an accuracy compara-
ble to that of TCSPC-based instruments. The modulated-PMT technique is some-
what less efficient than TCSPC and does not work well at extremely low photon
rates. Nevertheless, the sensitivity is well within the range required for fluores-
cence detection in DOT.
TCSPC is superior in terms of efficiency and sensitivity. The effective detec-
tion bandwidth is much higher than for modulation systems. The IRF can be kept