See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/10837915

Surface-reflection elimination in polarization imaging of superficial tissue

Article  in  Optics Letters · February 2003

DOI: 10.1364/OL.28.000114 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

80 969

2 authors:

Stephen P Morgan Ian Stockford

University of Nottingham AQA
197 PUBLICATIONS   2,255 CITATIONS    27 PUBLICATIONS   236 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Optics and phonics View project

Acoustics of biomaterials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stephen P Morgan on 29 July 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Surface Reflection Elimination in Polarization Imaging of Superficial

Tissue

Stephen P. Morgan and Ian M. Stockford.

School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham,

NG7 2RD, UK.

Abstract

A major drawback in polarization gating of light backscattered from tissue is that surface

reflections dominate the image. An optically flat plate and matching fluid applied to the

tissue surface, combined with off-axis detection has previously been used to address this

problem. This is often inappropriate or inconvenient for practical use and more

importantly can affect the tissue optical properties. A method is demonstrated which

combines images obtained with linearly and circularly polarized light to produce a

polarization gated image that is free from surface reflections and does not require

optically flat plates or matching fluid.

OCIS codes: (170.0170) Medical optics and biotechnology; (260.5430) Polarization.

1
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Light scattering by tissue gradually randomizes the original polarization state of the

illuminating light. Unscattered or weakly scattered light maintains its original

polarization state whereas multiple scattered light is randomly polarized and contributes

equally to both co- and cross- polarization states. A simple subtraction of co- and cross-

polarization states removes the multiple scattered background and enables the weakly

scattered component to be extracted. Polarization gating has been demonstrated as a

simple and effective method of improving image resolution and extracting light that has

propagated only within superficial tissue1-5. This light can potentially be used to

characterize skin lesions and is the subject of current research for several groups2-5.To

determine the diagnostic potential of polarized light techniques is beyond the scope of

this letter, the contribution of this letter is to demonstrate a new method for eliminating

surface reflections.

A common method of eliminating surface reflections in conventional reflection mode

imaging of tissue is to detect in cross polars6,7, however, this is inappropriate for

polarization imaging as the co-polar component contains light that has propagated only

through superficial tissue. An alternative approach is to apply an optically flat plate and

matching fluid to the tissue and position the detector off-axis to the illumination5,8. This

results in light from the surface being specularly reflected at the flat interface and not

being detected. This is often inconvenient for clinicians and patients, and inappropriate

for the tissue under investigation e.g. burn or wound characterization. More importantly,

2
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

compression of the skin can alter its optical and physical properties and affect diagnosis

by evacuating the blood vessels and distorting collagen architecture

In this letter we describe a method of extracting light that has propagated only within

superficial tissue while removing surface reflections using only polarized light

subtraction. This obviates the need for matching fluid and optically flat plates. In addition

the method enables co-axial detection, which often simplifies systems, for example in

endoscopy illumination and detection can use the same fiber bundle.

Fig. 1 demonstrates the different properties of light backscattered from linearly and

circularly polarized illumination. For linearly polarized illumination (fig. 1a) both the

surface reflection and weakly scattered light component maintain the original polarization

state. Multiple scattered light is randomly polarized and contributes equally to both co-

and cross-linear polarization channels. Backscattered light from circularly polarized

illumination has different properties (fig. 1b); light reflected directly from the surface

undergoes a mirror reflection and emerges with its helicity reversed. Due to the highly

forward scattering nature of tissue the majority of weakly scattered light maintains its

original polarization state. However, it should be noted that there is a small proportion of

light that emerges with its helicity reversed due to immediate backscattering from within

the medium itself. Again multiple scattered light contributes equally to both co- and

cross- circular polarization channels. The different detection channels and the properties

of the emerging light in these channels are summarized in table 1.

3
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

The key to the technique described is the observation that circularly polarized

illumination (channels 3 and 4) separates surface reflected light from weakly scattered

light, whereas linearly polarized light (channels 1 and 2) does not. Conventional

approaches1-5 subtract co- and cross-polarized components, usually channel 1 - channel 2.

Channels 2 and 3 are states that are free from surface reflection and therefore performing

a channel 3 - channel 2 subtraction allows both extraction of weakly scattered light and

elimination of surface reflections. In a previous publication9 we have demonstrated using

a polarization dependent Monte Carlo simulation that for typical tissue optical parameters

the polarized light extracted using this technique corresponds to a depth of 7 scattering

mean free paths (MFP) beneath the surface. It should be noted that due to polarization

memory effects10,11 the depth defined by the circular polarization gate is larger than that

defined by a linear polarization gate.

The experimental set up used to measure light in the four polarization channels is shown

in fig. 2. Laser light (λ = 633nm) is passed through a rotating diffuser (ground glass disc)

to eliminate speckle from the images. The polarization state of the light illuminating the

sample is set by a quarter waveplate and linear polarizer. Light backscattered from the

sample is analyzed using another quarter waveplate and linear polarizer before being

imaged onto a CCD camera. The exposure time of the CCD is fixed at 64s for each

polarization image and images are directly subtracted from one another, without any

normalization. The scattering phantoms used are a suspension of polystyrene

microspheres (g = 0.97, μs = 20mm-1) in a cuvette of dimensions 10mm x 47mm x 42mm.

4
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

To demonstrate the depth discrimination properties of the polarization gate we image an

absorbing object (totally absorbing Perspex disc, diameter = 3mm, attached to a

transparent Perspex rod) at three different depths (2, 10, 22 MFPs) within the medium.

The depths are chosen to fall within the gates for linear, circular and multiple scattered

light estimated from Monte Carlo simulations9. Clearly, these depths are less than the

pathlength required to randomize the polarization state (i.e. 1 transport mean free path for

linear polarization) as the imaging is in reflection geometry and photons emerging with

pathlengths shorter than this distance contribute to the polarization maintaining

component.

Phantom images are shown in fig. 3 for light extracted using linear polarization

subtraction (channel 1 – channel 2), circular polarization subtraction (channel 3 – channel

2) and multiple scattered light (channel 2 only) at the three different depths. The first

object depth (2 MFPs, 1st column) is chosen such that the object falls within the depth

defined by the linear polarization gate and therefore the object is visible in all images. At

the second depth (10 MFPs, 2nd column) the object is no longer visible in the linear

polarization image but is still visible in the other two. At the final depth (22MFPs, 3 rd

column) the object is barely visible in the circular polarization image but is still visible in

the multiple scattered light image. These results demonstrate the effect of the depth

discrimination properties of the different polarization gates but do not show elimination

of surface reflections as the surface of the cuvette is optically flat and detection is

performed off-axis.

It is therefore important to demonstrate the technique in a practical environment where

surface reflections are a significant problem. Fig. 4 demonstrates images taken in the four

5
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

polarization channels, described in table 1, of a lentigo on a 31 year old, Caucasian male.

As can be seen from the images in channels 1 and 4 (figs 4a and d) there is significant

contribution from the surface. Channels 2 and 3 (figs 4b & c) contain no significant

surface reflection and the difference in intensity between them can be attributed to

weakly scattered, circularly polarized light. A linear subtracted image (channel 1 –

channel 2) is shown in fig. 4e. The image is clearly dominated by the surface reflection,

which provides no information about the underlying tissue and distorts conventional

polarization images. A subtracted image (channel 3 – channel 2), containing light that has

propagated only through superficial tissue but free from surface reflection is shown in fig

4f.

The polarization subtraction method described has been demonstrated to be an effective

method of imaging superficial tissue. It is the subject of current research to determine

whether polarization imaging is a useful tool for skin characterization. Previous methods5

have required off-axis detection whereas this approach eliminates surface reflections

using polarization so on-axis detection is possible. For example a beamsplitter and a

single set of polarizing optics could be used to simplify the system. In addition on-axis

detection could be useful in endoscopy where illumination and detection could be

performed using the same fiber bundle.

It should be noted that some researchers1-4 choose to use a direct subtraction of

polarization states so that absorption information from the polarized maintaining light can

be obtained whereas others5 prefer to normalize the image by the total intensity in attempt

to negate the effects of absorption. The former approach may yield spectroscopic

6
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

information whereas the latter may enhance scattering effects. We choose to demonstrate

the surface reflection technique using the former but the approach is valid for both

methods.

Using the approach of taking images consecutively at different rotations of the quarter

waveplates and polarizers makes the technique susceptible to movement artifacts.

However, these effects could be eliminated by simultaneously imaging both co- and cross

polar channels with a polarizing beamsplitter and fast switching the input polarization

state using either a spatial light modulator or Pockels cell.

It should also be noted that due to polarization memory effects9-11 the extracted circularly

polarized light has probed slightly deeper than that probed by linearly polarized light and

that this may vary for different tissue types. Previously we have demonstrated9 that the

peak depths probed by linearly and circularly polarized light are 200m and 700m

respectively for typical tissue optical properties. In addition the polarization memory

effects mean that the amount of multiple scattered light is different in channels 2 and 3.

However, this difference is relatively insignificant and the majority of multiple scattered

light is eliminated to provide localization beneath the surface. In inhomogeneous tissue

polarisation memory effects may be less prominent making the performance of linear and

circular discrimination comparable; this is a study of current research.

A method of removing both light reflected from the tissue surface and light multiple

scattered from deeper tissue using only the polarization properties of the backscattered

light has been demonstrated. The technique is based upon the different scattering

7
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

properties of linear and circular polarization states. Performing a subtraction of the two

backscattered polarization channels that do not contain a surface reflected component

results in the extraction of weakly scattered light that has probed superficial tissue. This

component is important for skin characterization. This method obviates the need for

optically flat plates and matching fluid to be applied to the tissue. In addition on-axis

detection is possible, which enables simpler optical systems to be developed.

References

1. J.M.Schmitt, A.H.Gandjbakhche and R.F.Bonner, Appl. Opt. 31, 6535 (1992).

2. S.G.Demos and R.R.Alfano, Appl. Opt. 36, 150 (1997).

3. S.G.Demos, H.B.Radousky and R.R.Alfano, Opt. Express 7, 23 (2000),

http://www.opticsexpress.org/opticsexpress/ framestocv7n1.htm

4. S.P.Morgan, M.P.Khong and M.G.Somekh, Appl. Opt. 36, 1560 (1997).

5. S.L.Jacques, J.R.Roman and K.Lee, Lasers in Surg. & Med. 26, 119 (2000).

6. R.R. Anderson, Arch. Dermatol. 127, 1000 (1991).

7. W Groner, JW Winkelman, AG Harris, C Ince, GJ Bouma, K Messmer, RG

Nadeau, Nature Med. 5, 1209 (1999).

8. W. Stolz, O. Braun-Falco, P. Bilek, M. Landthaler and A.B. Cognetta, Color Atlas

of Dermatoscopy, Blackwell Science, (1993).

9. I.M.Stockford, S.P.Morgan, P.C.Y.Chang, J.G.Walker, to be published in J.

Biomedical Optics, July 2002.

8
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

10. F. C. MacKintosh, J. X. Zhu, D. J. Pine, and D. A. Weitz, Phys. Rev. B 40, 9342

(1989).

11. S.P. Morgan and M.E. Ridgway, Opt. Expr. 7, 540 (2000).

Figure Captions

Fig. 1 a) linear illumination & detection b) circular illumination & detection. Polarization

maintaining light is localised in region 1, multiple scattered light propagates through

deeper tissue (region 2). Circular polarization discriminates between polarization

maintaining and surface reflected light.

Fig. 2 Experimental set up. Laser light passes through a rotating ground glass diffuser.

The polarization state of the illuminating light is set using a linear polarizer and quarter

waveplate. Light emerging from the sample is analyzed before being imaged onto a CCD

camera.

Fig. 3 Images of object located at different depths (1st column – 2 MFPs, 2nd column – 10

MFPs, 3rd column – 22 MFPs) for different polarization gates (row 1 – linear polarization

gate, row 2 – circular polarization gate, row 3 – multiple scattered light).

Fig.4 Image of a lentigo in a) channel 1 b) channel 2 c) channel 3 d) channel 4 e) channel

1 – channel 2 f) channel 3 – channel 2

9
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Full References
1. J.M.Schmitt, A.H.Gandjbakhche and R.F.Bonner, "Use of polarized light to

discriminate short-path photons in a multiply scattering medium," Appl. Opt. 31,

6535 (1992).

2. S.G.Demos and R.R.Alfano, "Optical polarization imaging," Appl. Opt. 36, 150

(1997).

3. S.G.Demos, H.B.Radousky and R.R.Alfano, Opt. Express 7, 23 (2000),

http://www.opticsexpress.org/opticsexpress/ framestocv7n1.htm

4. S.P.Morgan, M.P.Khong and M.G.Somekh, "Effects of polarization state and

scatterer concentration on optical imaging through scattering media," Appl. Opt.

36, 1560 (1997).

5. S.L.Jacques, J.R.Roman and K.Lee, "Imaging superficial tissues with polarized

light," Lasers in Surg. & Med. 26, 119 (2000).

6. R.R. Anderson, Arch. Dermatol. 127, 1000 (1991).

7. W Groner, JW Winkelman, AG Harris, C Ince, GJ Bouma, K Messmer, RG

Nadeau, Nature Med. 5, 1209 (1999).

8. W. Stolz, O. Braun-Falco, P. Bilek, M. Landthaler and A.B. Cognetta, Color Atlas

of Dermatoscopy, Blackwell Science, (1993).

9. I.M.Stockford, S.P.Morgan, P.C.Y.Chang, J.G.Walker, “Analysis of the spatial

distribution of polarized light backscattered from layered scattering media,” to be

published in J. Biomedical Optics, July 2002.

10. F. C. MacKintosh, J. X. Zhu, D. J. Pine, and D. A. Weitz, "Polarization memory

of multiply scattered light," Phys. Rev. B 40, 9342 (1989).

10
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

11. S.P. Morgan and M.E. Ridgway, "Polarization properties of light backscattered

from a two layer scattering medium," Opt. Expr. 7, 540 (2000).

11
 Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Polarisation
Linear maintaining
Circular Polarisation maintaining
Illumination Surface Illumination
Surface reflection
reflection Multiple scattered

Multiple 1
scattered
1 2

Fig. 1 a) linear illumination & detection b) circular illumination & detection. Polarization maintaining light is localised
in region 1, multiple scattered light propagates through deeper tissue (region 2). Circular polarization discriminates
between polarization maintaining and surface reflected light.

12
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Fig. 2 Experimental set up. Laser light passes through a rotating ground glass diffuser. The polarization
state of the illuminating light is set using a linear polarizer and quarter waveplate. Light emerging from the
sample is analyzed before being imaged onto a CCD camera.

13
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Fig. 3 Images of object located at different depths (1 st column – 2 MFPs, 2nd column – 10 MFPs, 3rd column
– 20 MFPs) for different polarization gates (row 1 – linear polarization gate, row 2 – circular polarization
gate, row 3 – multiple scattered light).

14
Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

a) b)

c) d)

e) f)

Fig.4 Image of a lentigo in a) channel 1 b) channel 2 c) channel 3 d) channel 4 e) channel 1 – channel 2 f)

channel 3 – channel 2

15
 Optics Letters 02/2003; 28(2):114-6. DOI:10.1364/OL.28.000114

Table 1: Polarization discriminating detection schemes

Channel Illumination Detection Categories of light

Surface reflected,
1 Linear Co - Linear
Polarization maintaining
and multiple scattered light
2 Linear Cross - Linear Multiple scattered light
Polarization maintaining
3 Circular Co - Circular
and multiple scattered light
Surface reflected, mirror
4 Circular Cross - Circular
reflected scattered and
multiple scattered light

16

View publication stats