Stewart C J, Frank R, Forrester K R, Tulip J, Lindsay R, Bray R C
McCaig Centre for Joint Injury and Arthritis Research, Department of Surgery, University of Calgary, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, Alta., Canada T2N 4N1.
Burns. 2005 Sep;31(6):744-52. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2005.04.004.
UNLABELLED: Laser Doppler perfusion imaging (LDI) is an established technique for early assessment of burn depth to help determine a course of treatment. Laser speckle perfusion imaging (LSPI) is an alternative laser based, non-invasive perfusion monitoring technique that offers rapid and high resolution images of tissue. We have evaluated the ability of the LSPI instrument in determining and monitoring burn scar perfusion over time and compared it with the LDI instrument as a standard. METHODS: Ten patients with hypertrophic burn scars (time since injury: 1-8 months) were recruited. Burn scars were scanned with both instruments (LSPI and LDI) monthly over a period of 11 months. Clinical grading of the burn scars was assessed on every scan date using the Vancouver burn scar scale. RESULTS: Comparison of the perfusion values determined by each instrument shows a strong positive correlation, r2=0.86 (n=63). Each instrument's output also correlated significantly with the clinical grading of the scar, indicating the expected decrease in perfusion as the clinical condition of the scars improved with time. SIGNIFICANCE: The new LSPI instrument compared favorably with the established LDI instrument, yielding similar results. The considerably faster scan time and higher resolution of the LSPI method provides a distinct clinical advantage, both in terms of patient comfort and for reliably matching perfusion characteristics to their associated anatomical features. The fast temporal response of the LSPI instrument could be used to monitor near real-time responses to mechanical or pharmacological interventions to study dynamic vascular changes to burn damaged tissues.
未标注:激光多普勒灌注成像(LDI)是一种用于早期评估烧伤深度以帮助确定治疗方案的成熟技术。激光散斑灌注成像(LSPI)是另一种基于激光的非侵入性灌注监测技术,可提供组织的快速高分辨率图像。我们评估了LSPI仪器随时间确定和监测烧伤瘢痕灌注的能力,并将其与作为标准的LDI仪器进行了比较。 方法:招募了10名肥厚性烧伤瘢痕患者(受伤时间:1 - 8个月)。在11个月的时间里,每月用两种仪器(LSPI和LDI)对烧伤瘢痕进行扫描。在每次扫描日期使用温哥华烧伤瘢痕量表对烧伤瘢痕进行临床分级评估。 结果:比较每种仪器测定的灌注值显示出很强的正相关性,r2 = 0.86(n = 63)。每种仪器的输出也与瘢痕的临床分级显著相关,表明随着瘢痕临床状况随时间改善,灌注预期会降低。 意义:新的LSPI仪器与成熟的LDI仪器相比具有优势,产生了相似的结果。LSPI方法显著更快的扫描时间和更高的分辨率在患者舒适度以及将灌注特征与相关解剖特征可靠匹配方面都提供了明显的临床优势。LSPI仪器快速的时间响应可用于监测对机械或药物干预的近实时反应,以研究烧伤受损组织的动态血管变化。
IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2004-11
Biomed Opt Express. 2024-9-6
Commun Biol. 2023-5-25