Retinal imaging with optical coherence tomography and low-loss adaptive optics using a 2.8-mm beam size.
adaptive optics
optical coherence tomography
retinal imaging
wavefront sensing
wavefront shaping
Journal
Journal of biophotonics
ISSN: 1864-0648
Titre abrégé: J Biophotonics
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101318567
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
received:
21
05
2018
revised:
24
09
2018
accepted:
11
10
2018
pubmed:
18
10
2018
medline:
15
7
2020
entrez:
18
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
As data acquisition for retinal imaging with optical coherence tomography (OCT) becomes faster, efficient collection of photons becomes more important to maintain image quality. One approach is to use a larger aperture at the eye's pupil to collect more photons that have been reflected from the retina. A 2.8-mm beam diameter system with only seven reflecting surfaces was developed for low-loss retinal imaging. The larger beam size requires defocus and astigmatism correction, which was done in a closed loop adaptive optics method using a Shack-Hartmann wavefront sensor and a deformable mirror (DM) with 140 actuators and a ±2.75 μm stroke. This DM facilitates defocus correction ranging from approximately -3 D to +3 D. Comparing the new system with a standard 1.2-mm system on a model eye, a signal-to-noise gain of 4.5 dB and a 2.3 times smaller speckle size were measured. Measurements on the retinas of five subjects showed even better results, with increases in dynamic range up to 13 dB. Note that the new sample arm only occupies 30 cm × 60 cm, which makes it highly suitable for imaging in a clinical environment. Figure: B-scan images obtained over a width of 8 deg from the right eye of a 31-year-old Caucasian male. While the left side was imaged with a standard 1.2-mm OCT system, the right side was imaged with the 2.8-mm system. Both images were collected with the same integration time and incident power, after correction of aberrations. Using the dynamic range within the images, which is determined by comparing the highest pixel value to the noise floor, a difference in dynamic range of 10.8 dB was measured between the two systems.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30328279
doi: 10.1002/jbio.201800192
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e201800192Informations de copyright
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.