A Review of Polarization-Based Imaging Technologies for Clinical and Preclinical Applications
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Optics TOPICAL REVIEW A review of polarization-based imaging technologies for clinical and preclinical applications To cite this article: Jessica C Ramella-Roman et al 2020 J. Opt. 22 123001 View the article online for updates and enhancements. This content was downloaded from IP address 198.11.30.252 on 28/01/2021 at 00:56 Journal of Optics J. Opt. 22 (2020) 123001 (18pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/2040-8986/abbf8a Topical Review A review of polarization-based imaging technologies for clinical and preclinical applications Jessica C Ramella-Roman1,2, Ilyas Saytashev1,2 and Mattia Piccini1,3 1 Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering and Computing, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33174, United States of America 2 Department of Ophthalmology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, United States of America 3 Department of Information Engineering, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Via Pietro Vivarelli 10-41125, Modena, Italy E-mail: [email protected] Received 8 May 2020, revised 10 August 2020 Accepted for publication 1 October 2020 Published 11 November 2020 Abstract Polarization-based imaging can provide new diagnostic capabilities in clinical and preclinical studies. Various methodologies of increasing complexity have been proposed by different groups in the last 30 years. In this review we focus on the most widely used methods in polarization imaging including co- and cross-polarized-based imaging, Mueller matrix imaging, and polarization sensitive optical coherence tomography, among others. This short primer in optical instrumentation for polarization-based imagery is aimed at readers interested in including polarization in their imaging processes. Keywords: polarization, scattering, birefringence, polarization sensitive optical coherence tomography, Mueller matrix, stokes vectors (Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal) 1. Introduction electromagnetic fields. In biological media scattering is gener- ally very high, caused by a variety of components (organelles, The use of polarized light illumination and filtering for bio- nuclei, collagen fibrils bundles, cell membrane to name a few). medical applications has a long history. Polarized light is Different polarization states—linear, circular or elliptical— sensitive to structural component and materials with elevated depolarize at different rates as will be illustrated later in this birefringence hence it has been used extensively to investig- review. ate the extracellular matrix of several biological environments, Linear retardation is the phase shift between two orthogonal ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ including the skin [1–3], the eye cornea [4], connective tissue, linear polarization states (0 and 90 or +45 and −45 , for and many more. example). Circular retardation, also called optical rotation, is There are three recognized mechanisms that influence the difference in phase between right circular and left circu- the status of the polarization of light as it travels through lar polarized light travelled in a medium. Both linear and cir- a biological media: depolarization, retardation, and diatten cular retardation components contribute to a total retardation uation. of a media. Typically, fibrous structures such as the skin, the Depolarization occurs primarily due to multiple cornea, the sclera, tendon, cardiac tissue, and many others, scattering of light, and incoherent addition of the scattered strongly exhibit retardation. 2040-8986/20/123001+18$33.00 1 © 2020 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK J. Opt. 22 (2020) 123001 Topical Review Diattenuation, also called dichroism, is generally con- The orientation angle of the polarization ellipse can( then) be − sidered the smallest of all the effects in biological media and calculated through the Stokes vector as η = 1 tan 1 S2 and ( ) 2 S1 arises from polarization-selective attenuation of the electrical − ellipticity is = 1 sin 1 S3 . field. 2 S0 This review paper focuses on imaging applications of polar- A parameter often used in image polarimetry is the degree imetry in biology and medicine. Clearly, the technological of polarization P 2 2 2 1/2 and scientific development of these imaging modalities spur (S1+S2+S3) P = , P = 1 for completely polarized light and from previous work in atmospheric physics, chemistry, and S0 P = 0 for complete depolarization. microscopy [5–12]. We will limit the review to the imaging of While the Stokes parameter can then be used to character- bulk tissue, in vivo and ex vivo, where the effect of multiply- ize the status of the polarization of light, another framework is scattering photons cannot be ignored. necessary to characterize the media and optical elements inter- acting with a light beam. The Mueller calculus, introduced by 2. Polarized light Mueller [14], can be used to describe the changes in amplitude, direction, and relative phase (via S3) of the orthogonal field 2.1. Fundamentals components Ex and Ey. Given an input Stokes vector S and a Mueller matrix M In its classic formulation light transfer can be characterized characterizing the media, an output Stokes vector can be cal- utilizing the concept of electromagnetic fields propagating as culated as waves through media. The spatio-temporal field is a vector 2 3 where the electric field E(r,t) and magnetic field H(r,t) are m m m m 6 11 12 13 14 7 coupled. Polarization is a property of electromagnetic radi- 6 m21 m22 m23 m24 7 SOUT = MSIN M = 4 5 : (3) ation that relates to the position (r) in time (t) of the elec- m31 m32 m33 m34 tric field E. The state of the electromagnetic wave E can be m41 m42 m43 m44 represented by two independent field components, Ex(r,t) and Ey(r,t), orthogonal to each other and lying in the plane per- Multiple optical elements can be combined with this form- pendicular to the direction of propagation. If we consider the z alism to calculate the output Stokes vector, knowing its input direction of our reference frame for simplicity, we can repres- state. ent mathematically the propagating electromagnetic field with • • • • • two transverse components, Sout = Mn ::::: M4 M3 M2 M1 Sinput: (4) ( ; ) = (! − + δ ) Ex z t E0xcos t kz x Stokes vectors and Mueller matrices operate incoherent − (1) Ey (z;t) = E0ycos(!t kz + δy) superimpositions of light, hence although unable to describe interference or diffraction, are capable of dealing with field δ δ where E0x and E0y are the maximum amplitude, x and y are depolarization. phases, for the two directions x and y, and the term !t-kz is the propagator, where k is the wave number, and ! is angular frequency. The vectors Ex and Ey arise as the field propagates. 2.3. Jones calculus In order to simplify the calculations for polarized light When coherence is of interest the Jones calculus must be util- transfer through optical media and optical components, two ized. Introduced in 1941 [15–19], the Jones vector operates different formalisms are commonly used, the Stokes–Mueller on amplitudes and not intensities like the Stokes vectors. The calculus and the Jones calculus. Jones vector in fact takes the form of equation (5): ( ) 2.2. Stokes–Mueller calculus E ~E = x : (5) E The Stokes formalism, described by George G Stokes in 1852, y shows that any state of polarization of light can be expressed An electric vector Einput traveling through an optical ele- with four measurable quantities, arranged into a vector form. ment or scattered by a particle is transformed into Eout accord- The Stokes vector is composed of four real measurable quant- ing to equation (6) ities (S ,S ,S ,S or I,Q,U,V) that relate directly to the polar- 0 1 2 3 ( ) ( ) ization ellipse and the optical field [13]. input Eout E 2 3 2 3 2 3 x = J x (6) 2 2 out input S I E + E Ey Ey 6 0 7 6 7 6 0x 0y 7 6 S 7 6 Q 7 6 E2 − E2 7 ( ) 4 1 5 = 4 5 = 4 0x 0y 5: (2) (δ) j11 j12 S2 U 2E0xE0y cos where the Jones matrix J = is composed of four, S3 V 2E0xE0ysin(δ) j21 j22 often complex, elements j. 2 > 2 2 2 S0 S1 + S2 + S3 where the equal sign is used for completely Similar to Mueller matrices, the matrix product of mul- polarized light and the > sign is for unpolarized or partially tiple Jones matrices can be used to characterize a light polarized light. beam travelling through multiple optical elements of known 2 J. Opt. 22 (2020) 123001 Topical Review Figure 1. Typical imaging system based linear polarization gating. Jones matrices. Unlike Stokes–Mueller calculus, Jones cal- the glass interface could be removed [22] by adding circular culus describes only fully polarized light-matter interactions, polarized light sensing as well as using rotating orthogonal therefore it is not directly applicable to describing partial or polarization [23]. full depolarization. In later work, Jacques et al [2] used the layout of figure 1 to enhance the contrast of skin cancer and other lesions mar- gins. In their work two images were acquired: one where the 3. Incoherent systems source and detector polarizer’s optical axes were co-aligned (co-polarized detection, Ipar), and one where the analyzer’s 3.1. Linearly polarized imaging systems optical axis was perpendicular to the source polarizer’s optical axis (cross-polarized detection, Iper). Early work in biomedical applications of polarized light ima- The resulting image contrast (Pol), or the degree of linear ging focused on gating of linearly polarized light for glare polarization, was calculated as minimization, image quality improvement, superficial or deep surface imaging. An early report on the use of polarized p Ipar − Iper Q2 + U2 sunglasses as well as cross-polarization imagery in dermato- Pol = = : (7) logy is attributed to Anderson in 1991 [20]. Images of rosacea Ipar + Iper I in cross-polarization demonstrated how the technique could be used to enhance vascular contrast and minimize the glare from The Pol images have several advantages, as they elimin- the rough skin surface.