Modified optical coefficient measurement system for bulk tissue using an optical fiber insertion with varying field of view and depth at the fiber tip

  • Haruna NakazawaEmail author
  • Marika Doi
  • Emiyu Ogawa
  • Tsunenori Arai
Original Article


To measure the few millimeter–scale macroscopic optical properties of biological tissue, including the scattering coefficient, while avoiding the instability that originates from sample slicing preparation processes, we performed propagated light intensity measurements through an optical fiber that punctures the bulk tissue while varying the fiber tip depth and the field of view (FOV) at the tip; the results were analyzed using the inverse Monte Carlo method. We realized FOV changes at the fiber tip in the bulk tissue using a variable aperture that was located outside the bulk tissue through a short high-numerical aperture (high-NA) multi-mode fiber with a quasi-straight shape. Using a homogeneous optical model solution, we verified the principle and operation of the constructed experimental system. A 200-μm-core-diameter silica fiber with NA of 0.5 and length of 1 m installed in a 21G needle was used. The detection fiber’s shape was maintained over a radius of curvature of 30 cm. The dependences of the detected light intensity on the FOV and the depth showed better than 1.4% accuracy versus calculated dependences based on the measured optical properties of the solution. Adaptation of the method for use with complex structured biological tissue, particularly in the presence of a thick fascia, was not completely resolved. However, we believe that our specific fiber puncture–based measurement method for use in bulk tissue based on variation of the FOV with inverse Monte Carlo method-based analysis will be useful in obtaining optical coefficients while avoiding sample preparation–related instabilities.


Optical coefficient measurement Bulk tissue Field of view Ray tracing simulation Inverse Monte Carlo method 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. 1.
    Flock ST et al (1989) Monte Carlo modeling of light propagation in highly scattering tissues. I. Model predictions and comparison with diffusion theory. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 36(12):1162–1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ritz JP et al (2001) Optical properties of native and coagulated porcine liver tissue between 400 and 2400 nm. Lasers Surg Med 29(3):205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roggan A et al (1999) Optical properties of circulating human blood in the wavelength range 400–2500 nm. J Biomed Opt 4(1):36–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hammer M et al (1995) Optical properties of ocular fundus tissues – an in vitro study using the double-integrating-sphere technique and inverse Monte Carlo simulation. Phys Med Biol 40(6):963–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pickering JW et al (1993) Double-integrating-sphere system for measuring the optical properties of tissue. Appl Opt 32(4):399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beek JF et al (1997) In vitro double-integrating-sphere optical properties of tissues between 630 and 1064 nm. Phys Med Bio 42(11):2255–2261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Derbyshire GJ et al (1990) Thermally induced optical property changes in myocardium at 1.06 μm. Lasers Surg Med 10(1):28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Splinter R et al (1991) Optical properties of normal, diseased, and laser photocoagulated myocardium at the Nd: YAG wavelength. Lasers Surg Med 11(2):117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pickering JW et al (1993) Changes in the optical properties (at 632.8 nm) of slowly heated myocardium. Appl Opt 32(4):367–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jacques SL (2013) Optical properties of biological tissues: a review. Phys Med Biol 58(11):R37–R61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Graaff R et al (1993) Optical properties of human dermis in vitro and in vivo. Appl Opt 32(4):435–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wilson BC et al (1987) Indirect versus direct techniques for the measurement of the optical properties of tissues. Photochem Photobiol 46(5):601–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Muragaki Y et al (2013) Phase II clinical study on intraoperative photodynamic therapy with talaporfin sodium and semiconductor laser in patients with malignant brain tumors. J Neurosurg 119(4):845–852CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Prahl SA et al (1993) Determining the optical properties of turbid media by using the adding–doubling method. Appl Opt 32(4):559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cheong WF et al (1990) A review of the optical properties of biological tissues. IEEE J Quantum Electron 26(12):2166–2185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Toublanc D (1996) Henyey–Greenstein and Mie phase functions in Monte Carlo radiative transfer computations. Appl Opt 35(18):3270–3274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor H (1984) Bending effects in optical fibers. J Lightwave Technol 2(5):617–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Fundamental Science and Technology, Graduate School of Science and TechnologyKeio UniversityYokohama CityJapan

Personalised recommendations