Chammas M, Pain F. Choice of numerical implementation of spatial contrast calculation impacts microcirculation quantitation in laser speckle contrast imaging.
JOURNAL OF BIOMEDICAL OPTICS 2025;
30:046006. [PMID:
40242205 PMCID:
PMC12003051 DOI:
10.1117/1.jbo.30.4.046006]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2024] [Revised: 02/12/2025] [Accepted: 03/25/2025] [Indexed: 04/18/2025]
Abstract
Significance
Laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) allows noninvasive imaging of microcirculation. Its scope of clinical applications is growing, yet the literature lacks a comparison of the accuracy of methods used to compute the spatial contrastK s from which the blood flow index is derived.
Aim
We aim to evaluate the impact on flow quantitation of different computational approaches used to deriveK s .
Approach
We compare numerical calculation ofK s in Python and ImageJ applied to noise-free simulated data and to experimental data acquired in vivo in anesthetized mice. The estimation of the decorrelation timeτ c , inversely proportional to the blood flow index, is carried out following two approaches: LSCI asymptotic estimation and fitting the multiple exposure speckle imaging (MESI) model toK s ( T ) .
Results
For simulation data, we found variations of up to 58% for the blood flow index in the LSCI approach. Nonlinear fitting of the MESI model was less affected with discrepancies of only a few percent. Considering experimental data, the LSCI approximation led toK s with relative differences (up to 35%) depending on the calculation methods. The noise and limited exposure time strongly limited the accuracy of the LSCI asymptotic estimation. Adjustment of the MESI model to the data led to consistent values ofτ c in the 0.05 to 1 ms range with significant variations depending on the method used to calculateK s .
Conclusions
Numerical methods used to calculateK s should be precisely acknowledged and validated against direct calculation to ensure accuracy. Uniform filter approach leads to accurateK s values and is 100 times more computationally efficient than the D i r e c t calculation. Other investigated methods lead to various levels of errors in flow index estimation using LSCI. Errors are minimized using larger kernels. MESI derivation ofτ c is not immune but less affected by such methodological biases.
Collapse