Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 62, Issue 8
June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Point-scanning optimization for video-rate volumetric intraoperative OCT
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Eric Tang
    Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
  • Yuankai Tao
    Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Eric Tang, None; Yuankai Tao, Leica Microsystems (R), Vanderbilt University (P)
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH R01 EY030490, NIH R01 EY028133. NIH R01 HL136449, NIH R01 HL116597, NIH T32 EB021937
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 2522. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Eric Tang, Yuankai Tao; Point-scanning optimization for video-rate volumetric intraoperative OCT. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):2522.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Galvanometer scanner response fundamentally limits optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging performance. Scanning nonlinearities distort anatomic features and reduce image quality/resolution; and underdamped impulse response increases mirror settling duration and total acquisition time. Here, we present hardware and software scanner response optimizations and demonstrate benefits for video-rate volumetric intraoperative OCT.

Methods : Scanners (Saturn 5B, ScannerMax) were optimized iteratively using servo tuning parameters. A Gaussian process regression (GPR) model of step responses was developed and used to identify optimal tunings (Fig. 1). Improved imaging performance was validated using a custom 400 kHz swept-source OCT system and custom volumetric scan waveforms (Fig. 2).

Results : Mirror settling time was reduced by 39-58% and 17-58% for the slow- and fast-axis mirrors, respectively, over default tunings (Fig. 1(d),(e)). OCT volumes were acquired of 25G forceps at 16 Hz volume rate with 2560x250x50 pix. and 250 return lines (Fig. 2(a),(c)-(f)) and at 20 Hz volume rate with 2560x400x50 pix. and 0 return lines (Fig. 2(b),(g)-(j)). Scanner tuning optimization increased the number of linearly sampled lines by 12-101% (Fig. 2(f) vs. Fig. 2(c)-(e)) and by 18-72% (Fig. 2(j) vs. Fig. 2(g)-(i)) over default tunings for each scan waveform. Removing return lines increased the number of linearly sampled lines by 33-64% for all tunings (Fig. 2(g)-(j) vs. Fig. 2(c)-(f)).

Conclusions : The combination of hardware and software optimizations significantly increased both volume acquisition speed and linear field-of-view of volumetric OCT. These optimizations can benefit intraoperative OCT by improving the response of the scanners and minimizing image distortions during video-rate volumetric imaging of surgical dynamics.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

 

Figure 1. (a)-(c) Settling time optimization of three servo parameters for the fast-axis (Y) scan mirror (dashed – GPR estimated optimum). (d) Slow- (X) and (e) fast- (Y) axis step response for servo tunings (circles – settling time).

Figure 1. (a)-(c) Settling time optimization of three servo parameters for the fast-axis (Y) scan mirror (dashed – GPR estimated optimum). (d) Slow- (X) and (e) fast- (Y) axis step response for servo tunings (circles – settling time).

 

Figure 2. Measured scan waveform (a) with return cycles and (b) without return cycles. (c)-(f) En face OCT projections for each tuning for input waveform shown in (a). (g)-(j) En face OCT projections for each tuning for input waveform shown in (b). Images were cropped to corresponding regions of linear sampling denoted by colored circles in (a) and (b).

Figure 2. Measured scan waveform (a) with return cycles and (b) without return cycles. (c)-(f) En face OCT projections for each tuning for input waveform shown in (a). (g)-(j) En face OCT projections for each tuning for input waveform shown in (b). Images were cropped to corresponding regions of linear sampling denoted by colored circles in (a) and (b).

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×