首页> 外文期刊>Microvascular Research: An International Journal >Comparison between laser speckle contrast imaging and laser Doppler imaging to assess skin blood flow in humans.
【24h】

Comparison between laser speckle contrast imaging and laser Doppler imaging to assess skin blood flow in humans.

机译:激光散斑对比成像和激光多普勒成像之间的比较,以评估人体的皮肤血流。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: We tested the linearity between skin blood flux recorded with laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) and laser Doppler imaging (LDI), comparing different ways of expressing data. A secondary objective was to test within-subject variability of baseline flux with the two techniques. METHODS: We performed local heating at 36, 39, 42, and 44 degrees C on the forearm of healthy volunteers, and measured cutaneous blood flux with LDI and LSCI. Biological zero (BZ) was obtained by occluding the brachial artery. We expressed data as raw arbitrary perfusion units (APUs) and as a percentage increase from baseline (%BL), with and without subtracting BZ. Inter-site variability was expressed as a within subject coefficient of variation (CV). RESULTS: Twelve participants were enrolled. Inter-site variability at baseline was lower with LSCI (CV=9.2%) than with LDI (CV=20.7%). We observed an excellent correlation between both techniques when data were expressed as raw APUs or APU-BZ (R=0.90; p<0.001). The correlation remained correct for %BL (R=0.77, p<0.001), but decreased for %BL-BZ (R=0.44, p=0.003). Bland-Altman plots revealed a major proportional bias between the two techniques. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that skin blood flux measured with LSCI is linearly related to the LDI signal over a wide range of perfusion. Subtracting BZ does not affect this linearity but introduces variability in baseline flux, thus decreasing the correlation when data are expressed as a function of baseline. Finally, systematic bias makes it impossible to assimilate arbitrary perfusion units provided by the two systems.
机译:目的:我们比较了激光散斑对比成像(LSCI)和激光多普勒成像(LDI)记录的皮肤血流量之间的线性关系,比较了不同的数据表达方式。第二个目标是用两种技术测试基线通量的受试者内部变异性。方法:我们在健康志愿者的前臂上分别于36、39、42和44摄氏度进行局部加热,并使用LDI和LSCI测量皮肤的血流量。通过阻塞肱动脉获得生物零值(BZ)。我们将数据表示为原始任意灌注单位(APU),并表示相对于基线的增加百分比(%BL),带有和不带有BZ。站点间的可变性表示为主题内的变异系数(CV)。结果:十二名参与者被招募。 LSCI(CV = 9.2%)在基线时的站点间变异性低于LDI(CV = 20.7%)。当数据表示为原始APU或APU-BZ时,我们观察到两种技术之间的极好的相关性(R = 0.90; p <0.001)。相关性对于%BL保持正确(R = 0.77,p <0.001),但对于%BL-BZ降低(R = 0.44,p = 0.003)。 Bland-Altman图显示了两种技术之间的主要比例偏差。结论:这项研究表明,在广泛的灌注范围内,用LSCI测量的皮肤血流量与LDI信号线性相关。减去BZ不会影响此线性,但会导致基线通量发生变化,因此当数据表示为基线的函数时,会降低相关性。最后,系统的偏差使得不可能吸收两个系统提供的任意灌注单元。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号