Diagnosing Cancerous Tumor Using Photoacoustic Imaging and Thermoacoustic Tomography with Electric Excitation Techniques—A Numerical Approach for Comparison

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Electronic Engineering, Department of Electrical Engineering, Sahand University of Technology, Tabriz, Iran

2 Electronic engineering, Institute of Modern Physics, Shanxi Normal University, Linfen, P. R. China

Abstract

A numerical study and simulation of cancerous tumor detection using the Photoacoustic (PA) phenomenon and Thermoacoustic Tomography with Electric Excitation (TATE) are presented. This report was in a small dimension of mimic breast tissue. Moreover, the different layers of the breast were considered. The optical, thermal, elastic, electric, and acoustic characteristics of different layers of the breast tissue and tumor at a radiated laser wavelength (800 nm), and electric voltage pulse were accurately calculated or obtained from reliable sources to calculate accurately and realistically. Furthermore, the amount and power of voltage and laser have been selected as the minimum allowable values to accurately compare the two methods. Therefore, it was possible to rely on the values and characteristics of the resulting data in comparing the accuracy and clarification of the two methods. A single suitable platform for simulating, which is commercially available Finite Element software (COMSOL®), has been selected. By using this platform, we were able to simulate these two methods from stimulation to propagation continuously. Finally, by studying the data matrix of the two simulations, we can demonstrate the maximum difference of stress in and out of tumor in the two methods is about 0.1 Pa higher in PAT relative to the TATE. It means PAT is more accurate than TATE, and the combination of these two methods can be ideal for the accurate and complete study of cancerous tumors.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Soc, A.C.S.J.A.C., Breast cancer facts & figures 2019–2020. 2019: p. 1-44.
  2. Wang, L.V.J.I.J.o.S.T.i.Q.E., Tutorial on Photoacoustic microscopy and computed tomography. 2008. 14(1): p. 171-179.
  3. Wang, L.V.J.D.m., Ultrasound-mediated biophotonic imaging: a review of acousto-optical tomography and photo-acoustic tomography. 2004. 19(2-3): p. 123-138.
  4. Mozaffarzadeh, M., et al., Double-stage delay multiply and sum beamforming algorithm: Application to linear-array Photoacoustic Imaging. 2017. 65(1): p. 31-42.
  5. Mozaffarzadeh, M., et al., Linear-array Photoacoustic Imaging using minimum variance-based delay multiply and sum adaptive beamforming algorithm. 2018. 23(2): p. 026002.
  6. Xu, M. and L.V.J.R.o.s.i. Wang, Photoacoustic Imaging in biomedicine. 2006. 77(4): p. 041101.
  7. Bera, T.K., J. Nagaraju, and G.J.J.o.V. Lubineau, Electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS)-based evaluation of biological tissue phantoms to study multifrequency Electrical Impedance Tomography (Mf-EIT) systems. 2016. 19(4): p. 691-713.
  8. Song, J., et al., Three-dimensional model of Thermoacoustic Tomography with Electric Excitation. 2018. 124(16): p. 164902.
  9. Wang, L., et al., MCML—Monte Carlo modeling of light transport in Multi-Layered Tissue s. 1995. 47(2): p. 131-146.
  10. Wang, L. and S.L.J.T.U.o.T. Jacques, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Monte Carlo modeling of light transport in Multi-Layered Tissue s in standard C. 1992. 4(11).
  11. Treeby, B.E. and B.T.J.J.o.b.o. Cox, k-Wave: MATLAB toolbox for the simulation and reconstruction of Photoacoustic wave fields. 2010. 15(2): p. 021314.
  12. Cassidy, J., et al., High-performance, robustly verified Monte Carlo simulation with FullMonte. 2018. 23(8): p. 085001.
  13. Wang, Z., S. Ha, and K. Kim. Evaluation of finite-element-based simulation model of Photoacoustic s in biological tissues. in Medical Imaging 2012: Ultrasonic Imaging, Tomography, and Therapy. 2012. International Society for Optics and Photonics.
  14. Akhlaghi, N., et al., Multidomain computational modeling of Photoacoustic Imaging: verification, validation, and image quality prediction. 2019. 24(12): p. 121910.
  15. Xu, Y. and Q. Zhu. Comparison of Finite Element and Monte Carlo simulations for inhomogeneous advanced breast cancer imaging. in Excerpt from the Proc. of the COMSOL Conf. Boston. 2010.
  16. Multiphysics, C., 3.4, COMSOL AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
  17. Omidi, P., et al., A novel dictionary-based image reconstruction for Photoacoustic computed tomography. 2018. 8(9): p. 1570.
  18. Wang, L.V., Photoacoustic Imaging and spectroscopy. 2017: CRC press.
  19. Li, C., L.V.J.P.i.M. Wang, and Biology, Photoacoustic tomography and sensing in biomedicine. 2009. 54(19): p. R59.
  20. Lynch, P.J.J.C.f.A.I.M., illustrator; C. Carl Jaffe; MD; cardiologist Yale University Center for Advanced Instructional Media Medical Illustrations by Patrick Lynch, generated for multimedia teaching projects by the Yale University School of Medicine. 1987. 2000.
  21. Paruch, M.J.M., Mathematical modeling of breast tumor destruction using fast heating during radiofrequency ablation. 2019. 13(1): p. 136.
  22. Jacques, S.L.J.P.i.M. and Biology, Optical properties of biological tissues: a review. 2013. 58(11): p. R37.
  23. Dehghani, H., et al., Near infrared optical tomography using NIRFAST: Algorithm for numerical model and image reconstruction. 2009. 25(6): p. 711-732.
  24. Hale, G.M. and M.R.J.A.o. Querry, Optical constants of water in the 200-nm to 200-μm wavelength region. 1973. 12(3): p. 555-563.
  25. Prahl, S., Assorted Spectra. 2017.
  26. Foundation, I.I., Tissue Properties Database V4. 0. 2011.
  27. Soltani, M., et al., Breast cancer diagnosis with a microwave Thermoacoustic imaging technique—a numerical approach. 2019. 57(7): p. 1497-1513.
  28. Grimal, Q., S. Naïli, and A.J.J.o.b. Watzky, A high-frequency lung injury mechanism in blunt thoracic impact. 2005. 38(6): p. 1247-1254.
  29. Zhutovsky, S. and K. Kovler, Evaluation of the thermal expansion coefficient using non-destructive testing, in CONCREEP 10. 2015. p. 1137-1146.
  30. Li, C., et al., In vivo breast sound-speed imaging with ultrasound tomography. 2009. 35(10): p. 1615-1628.
  31. Bhatti, S.N. and M.J.M.P. Sridhar‐Keralapura, A novel breast software phantom for biomechanical modeling of elastography. 2012. 39(4): p. 1748-1768.
  32. Gefen, A., B.J.T. Dilmoney, and H. Care, Mechanics of the normal woman's breast. 2007. 15(4): p. 259-271.
  33. Pal, U.M., et al., Thermo‐optic measurements and their inter‐dependencies for delineating cancerous breast biopsy tissue from adjacent normal. 2021. 14(8): p. e202100041.
  34. Shokoufi, M., Multi-modality breast cancer assessment tools using diffuse optical and electrical impedance spectroscopy. 2016, Applied Sciences: School of Mechatronic Systems Engineering.
AUT Journal of Electrical Engineering
Volume 54, Issue 2 (Special Issue)
December 2022
Pages 409-420

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics