• Skin Res Technol · Feb 2013

    Comparative Study

    High-resolution imaging of basal cell carcinoma: a comparison between multiphoton microscopy with fluorescence lifetime imaging and reflectance confocal microscopy.

    • Marco Manfredini, Federica Arginelli, Christopher Dunsby, Paul French, Clifford Talbot, Karsten König, Giovanni Pellacani, Giovanni Ponti, and Stefania Seidenari.
    • Department of Dermatology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy. manfredini7@hotmail.it
    • Skin Res Technol. 2013 Feb 1; 19 (1): e433-43.

    AimsThe aim of this study was to compare morphological aspects of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) as assessed by two different imaging methods: in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) and multiphoton tomography with fluorescence lifetime imaging implementation (MPT-FLIM).MethodsThe study comprised 16 BCCs for which a complete set of RCM and MPT-FLIM images were available. The presence of seven MPT-FLIM descriptors was evaluated. The presence of seven RCM equivalent parameters was scored in accordance to their extension. Chi-squared test with Fisher's exact test and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient were determined between MPT-FLIM scores and adjusted-RCM scores.ResultsMPT-FLIM and RCM descriptors of BCC were coupled to match the descriptors that define the same pathological structures. The comparison included: Streaming and Aligned elongated cells, Streaming with multiple directions and Double alignment, Palisading (RCM) and Palisading (MPT-FLIM), Typical tumor islands, and Cell islands surrounded by fibers, Dark silhouettes and Phantom islands, Plump bright cells and Melanophages, Vessels (RCM), and Vessels (MPT-FLIM). The parameters that were significantly correlated were Melanophages/Plump Bright Cells, Aligned elongated cells/Streaming, Double alignment/Streaming with multiple directions, and Palisading (MPT-FLIM)/Palisading (RCM).ConclusionAccording to our data, both methods are suitable to image BCC's features. The concordance between MPT-FLIM and RCM is high, with some limitations due to the technical differences between the two devices. The hardest difficulty when comparing the images generated by the two imaging modalities is represented by their different field of view.© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,704,841 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.