Mueller-matrix-based polarization imaging and quantitative assessment of optically anisotropic polycrystalline networks

Mariia Borovkova; Larysa Trifonyuk; Volodymyr Ushenko; Olexander Dubolazov; Oleg Vanchulyak; George Bodnar; Yurii Ushenko; Olena Olar; Olexander Ushenko; Michael Sakhnovskiy; Alexander Bykov; Igor Meglinski

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0214494

Abstract

We introduce a Mueller-matrix imaging polarization-based approach for the quantitative digital screening of the polycrystalline structure of fibrillary-based biological tissues in vitro. The morphometric evaluation of histological sections of myocardium was performed utilizing the high-order statistical moments calculated based on the spatial distribution of linear and circular birefringence and dichroism obtained experimentally. We demonstrate that spatial distributions of phase of light and optical anisotropy of scattering inherent to fibrillar networks of myocardium at different necrotic stages can be effectively used as a quantitative marker of stages of myosin fibril degradation. Processing the images of phase of light scattered in biological tissues with high order statistical analysis provides a functional tool for the quantitative characterization of necrotic conditions of the myocardium.

Citation: Borovkova M, Trifonyuk L, Ushenko V, Dubolazov O, Vanchulyak O, Bodnar G, et al. (2019) Mueller-matrix-based polarization imaging and quantitative assessment of optically anisotropic polycrystalline networks. PLoS ONE 14(5): e0214494. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494

Editor: Thomas Abraham, Pennsylvania State Hershey College of Medicine, UNITED STATES

Received: November 21, 2017; Accepted: March 15, 2019; Published: May 16, 2019

Copyright: © 2019 Borovkova et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper.

Funding: This project was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 713606 (MB). Author IM acknowledges support provided by INFOTECH strategic funding from the University of Oulu, MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) Academic Excellence Project (Contract No. 02.a03.21.0005) and the National Research Tomsk State University Academic D.I. Mendeleev Fund Programme. Author AB acknowledges funding from the Academy of Finland (314369 and 290596).

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

In addition to the conventional methods, typically used for quantitative characterization of turbid tissue-like phase-inhomogeneous scattering media, the new promising approaches, such as optical polarimetry and Mueller-matrix imaging are used extensively for screening of optically anisotropic biological samples [1–7]. Sufficient progress was achieved in the theoretical description and modeling of the optical radiation propagation in a turbid tissue-like scattering medium [8–11], as well as in polarimetric microscopy studies of protein fibrils of optically thin (non-depolarizing) tissue slices [12]. The application of the circularly polarized laser light is extended meaningfully for the functional histological examination of paraffin-embedded tissue blocks [13,14]. An important feature of the unified quantitative assessment of morphological images of biological tissues containing collagen fibrils is the quantitative assessment of fibrils’ size, density [15], and spatial orientation [16]. No less relevant direction in the use of Muller-matrix polarimetry is the study of the effectiveness of the diagnosis of human colon cancer [17]. The analysis of Mueller-matrix images of histological sections of biological tissues was continued by means of high-order statistical analysis of tissue samples with optical anisotropy [18–20]. Based on the acknowledged peculiarities of polarized light propagated in turbid tissue-like scattering medium [13,14], the new diagnostic modality for the cancer screening and characterization of abnormalities in biological tissues due to cancer aggressiveness has been suggested [21–27]. This approach is based on the analysis and differentiation of fully polarized and completely depolarized Mueller-matrix components [28] and can be potentially utilized for the reconstruction and quantitative evaluation of the polycrystalline structure of fibrillar network. Current study is dedicated to the development of the Mueller-matrix imaging approach and the reconstruction of the spatial distribution of optical anisotropy associated with the necrotic variations in histological sections of the fibrillary-based tissue samples, such as myocardium.

Despite the fact that nowadays microscopy-based histochemical screening of postmortem tissues is the leading technique in morphological and forensic diagnostic studies [29], this approach does not exceed 65%-70% of accuracy and is rather time-consuming [30].

Method and materials

Basic equations and theoretical remarks

Typically, optical anisotropy of biological tissues is defined as linear and circular birefringence (phase anisotropy) and linear and circular dichroism (amplitude anisotropy) [1–7, 15–20]. Circular birefringence and dichroism appear due to the spiral-like structure of protein molecules, whereas linear birefringence and dichroism are associated with the spatially ordered fibrillar networks in biological tissues.

The theoretical basis of the Mueller-matrix imaging approach to describe the interaction of optical radiation with depolarizing layers is widely presented in literature [31–39]. Specifically, in case of multiple scattering, the Mueller matrix of a depolarizing layer varies along the direction of light propagation. This can be described analytically, as: (1)

Where {M}(z) is the Mueller matrix of the object in the plane z(0≤z≤l); {m}(z) is differential Mueller matrix.

The ratio between the matrices {M}(z) and {m}(z) is given by: (2)

Here, 〈{m}〉 is the polarization part, and 〈{Δm²}〉 is the depolarization part of the Mueller matrix {M}(z) of the scattering layer.

The differential matrix {m}(z) consists of six basic polarization properties that fully describe optical anisotropy of the biological layer: (3)

Here, LD_0,90, LD_45,135 and LB_0,90, LB_45,135 stand for the linear dichroism and birefringence; CD_⊗;⊕ and CB_⊗;⊕ are the circular dichroism and birefringence of the optically anisotropic component of the biological layer for the linearly (0⁰÷90⁰; 45⁰÷135⁰), circularly right- (⊗) and left- (⊕) polarized unit vectors.

The analysis of Eqs (1)–(3) is resulted in an expression in form of logarithmic matrix: (4)

Here, G = diag(1,−1,−1,−1). is the metric of Minkowsky matrix [39], T is the transpose operation.

Taking into account Eqs (2), (4), the polarization component 〈{m}〉 of the logarithmic matrix algorithm ln{M(z)} is described: (5)

From Eqs (3) and (5) we obtain a way for the polarization reconstruction of the phase (Δn_0;90; Δn_45;135; Δn_⊗;⊕) and amplitude (Δμ_0;90; Δμ_45;135; Δμ_⊗;⊕) anisotropy parameters: (6) (7)

The spatial distributions Φ(m×n) and A(m×n), obtained within a set of pixels (m×n) of the photosensitive area of a digital camera, are further referred as the polarization-phase images of polycrystalline structure (optically anisotropic medium with a probability distribution of the directions of the optical axes and phase shifts) of fibrillar networks of biological tissues.

Experimental method

Experimental studies were performed using the classic polarimetry setup [18,19] schematically presented in Fig 1.

Download:

Fig 1. Schematic presentation of the Mueller-polarimeter experimental setup, including “blue” laser diode (1), collimator (2), stationary quarter-wave plate (3), mechanically movable quarter-wave plates (5) and (8), polarizer (4) and analyzer (9), object of investigation (6), infinity corrected strain-free objective with tube lens (7), CCD camera (10), personal computer (11).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.g001

The tissue sample (6) was illuminated by the laser beam (diameter ∅ = 10⁴ μm) generated by the “blue” laser diode (1) at the wavelength λ = 0.405μm with power W = 50μW (see Fig 1). The polarized light source consisted of quarter-wave plates (Achromatic True Zero-Order Wave-plates: (3), (5), (8)) and the polarizer (4). Histological slices of biological tissues (6) were placed in the focal plane of the strain-free objective Nikon CFI Achromat P (7), with the working distance of 30mm, NA of 0.1, and 4x magnification). The strain-free objective formed the spatial intensity distribution at the plane of the light-sensitive CCD-camera (Imaging Source DMK 41AU02.AS, monochrome 1/2" CCD, Sony ICX205AL (progressive scan); resolution of m×n = 1280x960; light-sensitive plate size of 7600x6200 μm; sensitivity of 0.05 lx; dynamic range of 8 bit; SNR of 9 bit, deviation of photosensitive characteristics from the linear ones did not exceed 5%). The camera provided the images of histological slices of biological tissues for geometrical sizes of 2–2000 μm.

Polarization filtration of the images of the histological slices of biological tissues was carried out utilizing the quarter-wave plate and polarizer (see Fig 1). The spatial distributions of the values of Stokes vector parameters S_i=1;2;3;4(m×n) were determined based on the following standard measuring procedure [4,7,18]:

the polarization illuminator formed the series of linear (0⁰; 45⁰; 90⁰) and right- (⊗) circularly polarized illuminating laser beams;
for each laser beam, the transmission axis of the polarizer was rotated by angles Ω = 0⁰;90⁰;45⁰;135⁰;
for each value of Ω, the spatial distribution of the intensity of linearly polarized light was measured;
the quarter-wave plate was placed in front of the polarizer; the fast axis of the quarter-wave plate was rotated by the angles Θ = 45⁰ and Θ = −45⁰ from the polarization transmission axis;
spatial intensity distributions of the right (⊗) and left (⊕) circularly polarized light were measured by the camera for each angle Θ;
spatial distributions of Stokes-vector parameters were calculated as follows:

(8)

Finally, the set of Mueller-matrix elements M_ik was calculated for each pixel of the camera: (9)

The accuracy of the polarimetric measurement of the magnitude of the elements of the Mueller matrix is: M_{i = 1−3;j = 1−3} = 2%; M_{i = 1−4;j =4};M_{i = 4;j = 1−4} = 4% [18–19].

Using the (Eqs 8 and 9), the elements 〈{m_ik}〉 of the differential matrix of the 1^st order (5) were determined for each pixel of the camera. Then, using the relations (6) and (7), the spatial distribution of the phase (Φ(m×n)) and amplitude (A(m×n)) anisotropy of fibrillar networks of biological tissues were found. Further in the text, polarization-phase spatial distributions are denoted as PT.

Analysis of Mueller-matrix elements

Utilizing Eqs (6)–(9), obtained spatial distributions PT(m×n) were analyzed within the statistical approach [20]. By means of MATLAB software, we calculated the histograms N(Φ), N(A) (operator “hist”) and statistical moments of the 1^st-4^th order (operator “mean”, “std”, “skewness”, “kurtosis”), which characterize the distributions PT(m×n): (10)

Here, K is the number of pixels on the CCD-camera. These parameters characterize the mean value(Z₁), dispersion (Z₂), skewness (Z₃) and kurtosis or “peak sharpness” (Z₄) of the histograms N(Φ) and N(A).

Results and discussion

Samples, preparation and statistical validation

We investigated samples of myocardium with necrotic conditions which are problematic to diagnose. The samples were provided by the Department of Pathology of the Oulu University Hospital from the collection used for teaching purposes; all the required consents and permissions for using the samples were acquired. The authors of the manuscript do not have any identifying information of the patients; none of the authors is a treating physician. The samples were taken as a part of routine care; they were not specially collected for the current study. The samples were assessed retrospectively.

The samples were divided into 2 groups: (i) myocardium of patients deceased as a result of the ischemic heart disease (IHD—group 1 "control") and acute coronary insufficiency (ACI—group 2 "diagnosed").

The objects selected for the study combine the similarity in polycrystalline structure, namely, the presence of fibrillar networks (Δn_0;90;Δn_45;135;Δμ_0;90;Δμ_45;135), formed by optically active (Δn_⊗;⊕;Δμ_⊗;⊕) protein molecules of myosin. The comparative qualitative analysis of microscopic images revealed (see Fig 2): (i) the individual structure of polarization-visualized fibrillar networks of the histological sections of the myocardium; (ii) the absence of pronounced differences between the polycrystalline structures of all tissue samples within the control and investigated groups.

Download:

Fig 2.

Microscopic (4x) polarization-visualized images of the optically anisotropic component of the histological sections of the myocardium of control (a) and diagnosed (b) groups.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.g002

The differentiation of necrotic conditions of the myocardium histological sections was performed by the biopsy of surgically removed samples, which is believed to be a gold standard method. A number of 51 samples for all groups was determined as reliable by means of the Statmate software for the 95% confidence interval (p<0.05).

The samples of all biological tissues were prepared utilizing a freezing microtome according to the standard methodology. Most commonly used histological slices of optically thick (l = 30μm÷40μm) biological tissues were selected for the study. For all samples the multiple scattering regime was implemented: all the samples partly depolarize laser radiation (attenuation coefficient τ>0.01≈0.05÷0.07). Thus, the traditional laser polarimetry approach is limited to an approximation in the description of non-depolarizing optically thin layers (τ<0.01) [18–20] therefore, further generalization of Mueller-matrix mapping based on Eqs (3) and (5)-(9) is required.

Mueller-matrix mapping of biological tissues histological sections

Fig 3 present spatial distribution of polarization PT(m×n) and histograms N(PT) of the distribution of the phase and amplitude anisotropy of the myocardium.

Download:

Fig 3. Polarization-phase spatial distribution PT(m×n) and histograms N(PT) of the distributions Φ(m×n) and A(m×n) of myocardium histological sections of deceased patients from the group 1 (Δn_0;90, Δn_⊗;⊕, Δμ_0;90, Δμ_⊗;⊕) and the group 2 (

,

).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.g003

The linear birefringence Δn_0;90 and dichroism Δμ_0;90 are more vivid compared to the circular phase Δn_⊗;⊕ and amplitude Δμ_⊗;⊕ anisotropy (see Fig 3). This is illustrated quantitatively by the lower values of the main extrema of N(Δn_0;90) = 0 and N(Δμ_0;90) = 0. Therefore, the larger average values () of histograms N(Δn_0;90) and N(Δμ_0;90) are formed. The comparison of the spatial distributions of polarization phase of the myocardium tissue samples has revealed the lower level of the linear birefringence and dichroism in the control group 1(IHD) - (see Fig 3), than in “pathology” group 2.

The obtained results are believed to be explained with accordance to the following physical considerations. Long process of IHD leads to the degenerative and dystrophic changes of the myocardium [28,29]. This is optically manifested by the decrease of the linear birefringence and dichroism due to the disorientation and reduction of the size of myosin fibrils [18–20]. Therefore, the distribution histograms N(Δn_0;90) and N(Δμ_0;90)(see Fig 3) obtained for histological slices of myocardium with IHD are characterized by the higher values (lower average Z₁) of the main extrema of N(Δn_0;90) = 0 and N(Δμ_0;90 = 0). In addition, the half-width (dispersion Z₂), as well as the skewness (Z₃) and sharpness of the peak (kurtosis Z₄) of such dependences are different.

In order to obtain quantitative estimates of the differentiation of the histological sections of the myocardium, the statistical analysis of the structure of polarization-phase images within both groups was performed.

Statistical analysis

Here, we present the results of the statistical analysis of the data from two methods: the polarization microscopy (I_0;90(m×n)) and the polarization-phase spatial distributions (Φ(m×n) and A(m×n)).

The differentiation between the groups of control (“1”) and investigated groups (“2”) was determined by using the following methodology [40–42]:

within each set of values of statistical moments Z_{i = 1;2;3;4} (Eq (10)) we determined the average value and standard deviation σ_{i = 1;2;3;4};
differences between the statistical sets Z_{i = 1;2;3;4} were significant in the case when the average value within the control group didn't "overlap" with the standard deviation σ_{i = 1;2;3;4} within the investigated group and vice versa;
within both groups of biological tissues samples, the cutoff of 3σ (99.72% of all possible values of changes of Z_i) was chosen for the distributions of values of the each statistical moment . Sequentially, we determined the number of "false negative" (b) and "false positive" (d) conclusions;
for every statistical moment, the traditional for probative medicine operational characteristics⁴² were calculated: sensitivity (), specificity () and balanced accuracy (), where a and b are the number of correct and wrong diagnoses within group (“1”); c and d are the same within group (“2”) were determined.

Method of polarization microscopy.

The results of the statistical and information analysis of the intensity distributions of the polarization-visualized images of the polycrystalline structure of biological tissues of all types are presented in Table 1.

Download:

Table 1. Parameters of the statistical analysis of polarization images of the polycrystalline structure of myocardium.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.t001

The obtained results show insufficient level of accuracy of the polarization microscopy of myocardium necrotic changes. The value of balanced accuracy does not exceed 70% [29,30].

Method of polarization-phase imaging.

The comparative analysis of the obtained data showed that the differences between the values of average moments of all orders are statistically valid (Table 2).

Download:

Table 2. Parameters of the statistical analysis of myocardium polarization-phase images.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.t002

However, there is an intergroup overlap for all histograms N(Z_i). Moreover, the range of such an overlap is inversely proportional to the value of the difference between the averages . The moments Z_{i = 3;4}(Δn_0;90) and Z_{i = 3;4}(Δμ_0;90) appeared to be sensitive to the differentiation of linear birefringence and dichroism maps Δn_0;90(m×n);Δμ_0;90(m×n) of myocardium histological sections (highlighted in grey in Table 2). For the circular birefringence and dichroism, the polarization-phase images Δn_⊗;⊕(m×n);Δμ_⊗;⊕(m×n) of myocardium layers are less informative. The difference between the values of in both groups of myocardium samples is not so vivid.

Table 3 presents the parameters of operational characteristics of the polarization-phase images of the optical anisotropy of histological sections of the myocardium biopsy with different necrotic changes.

Download:

Table 3. Operational characteristics of the method of the Mueller-matrix images of the optical anisotropy of the histological sections of the myocardium biopsy.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214494.t003

The obtained results enable to state a rather high level of accuracy of the polarization-phase imaging. According to the criteria of probative medicine [39–41], the parameters Ac(Z₃(Δn_0;90;Δμ_0;90))~90% correspond to the good quality, while Ac(Z₄(Δn_0;90;Δμ_0;90))≻90% correspond to the high quality.

Conclusions

The efficiency of the developed Mueller-matrix-based polarization imaging technique for the diagnosis of the necrotic changes of multiple scattering myocardium tissues has been introduced. The high-order statistical moments of distributions of the linear and circular birefringence, dichroism and their variations are utilized for the quantitative non-invasive assessment of the myocardium histological sections. We show that distributions of the phase and optical anisotropy formed by fibrillar networks of myocardium at different necrotic stages can be used as the quantitative diagnostic parameters. The differentiation criteria between the causes of death due to ACI and IHD were defined using the statistical analysis (statistical moments of the 1st– 4th order) of polarization-phase images of the polycrystalline structure of myocardium. The suggested quantitative approach is fast enough (the time of getting the result is t≤15 minutes) compared to the other techniques currently used in clinical practice. Thus, it has a strong potential for the application in histology for the differentiation of causes of necrotic changes in fibrillar tissues of various human organs. In the further studies, in order to implement this method into the routine laboratory practice in forensic medicine, a number of clinical tests are required.

References

1. Tuchin V, Wang L, Zimnjakov D. Optical polarization in biomedical applications. New York, USA: Springer; 2006.
2. Ghosh N, Wood M, Vitkin A. Polarized light assessment of complex turbid media such as biological tissues via Mueller matrix decomposition. In: Tuchin V, editors. Handbook of Photonics for Biomedical Science. London: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2010. pp. 253–282.
3. Jacques S. Polarized light imaging of biological tissues. In: Boas D, Pitris C, Ramanujam N, editors. Handbook of Biomedical Optics. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press; 2011. pp. 649–669.
4. Ghosh N. Tissue polarimetry: concepts, challenges, applications, and outlook. J. Biomed. Opt. 2011;16(11):110801. pmid:22112102
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
5. Layden D, Ghosh N, Vitkin A. Quantitative polarimetry for tissue characterization and diagnosis. In: Wang R, Tuchin V, editors. Advanced Biophotonics: Tissue Optical Sectioning. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2013. pp. 73–108.
6. Vo-Dinh T. Biomedical photonics handbook: 3 volume set. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014.
7. Vitkin A, Ghosh N, Martino A. Tissue polarimetry. In: Andrews D, editors. Photonics: Scientific Foundations, Technology and Applications. 4th ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2015. pp. 239–321.
8. Kuzmin VL, Meglinski I. Coherent multiple scattering effects and Monte Carlo method. JETP Letters, 2004; 79(3):109–112
- View Article
- Google Scholar
9. Kuzmin VL, Meglinski I. Coherent effects of multiple scattering for scalar and electromagnetic fields: Monte-Carlo simulation and Milne-like solutions. Opt. Commun. 2007; 273(2):307–310
- View Article
- Google Scholar
10. Doronin A, Macdonald C, Meglinski I. Propagation of coherent polarized light in turbid highly scattering medium. J. Biomed. Opt. 2014;19(2):025005. pmid:24556700
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
11. Doronin A, Radosevich A, Backman V, Meglinski I. Two electric field Monte Carlo models of coherent backscattering of polarized light. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2014;31(11):2394.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
12. Gopinathan PA, Kokila G, Jyothi M, Ananjan C, Pradeep L, and Nazir SH. Study of Collagen Birefringence in Different Grades of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Using Picrosirius Red and Polarized Light Microscopy. Scientifica.2015; 2015:802980. pmid:26587310
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Kunnen B, Macdonald C, Doronin A, Jacques S, Eccles M, and Meglinski I. Application of circularly polarized light for non-invasive diagnosis of cancerous tissues and turbid tissue-like scattering media, J. Biophoton. 2015; 8(4):317–323
- View Article
- Google Scholar
14. Meglinski I, Macdonald C, Doronin A, and Eccles M. Screening cancer aggressiveness by using circularly polarized light”, in: Optics in the Life Sciences, OSA Technical Digest (Optical Society of America), 2013; paper BM2A.4.
15. Rich L and Whittaker P. Collagen and picrosirius red staining: a polarized light assessement of fibrillar hue and spatial distribution. Braz. J.Morphol. Sci. 2005; 22:97–104.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
16. Bancelin S, Nazac A, Ibrahim BH, Dokládal P, Decencière E, Teig B et. al. Determination of collagen fiber orientation in histological slides using Mueller microscopy and validation by second harmonic generation imaging. Opt.Exp. 2014;22(19):22561–22574
- View Article
- Google Scholar
17. Pierengelo A, Benali A, Antonelli MR, Novikova T, Validire P, Gayet B et. аl. Ex-vivo characterization of human colon cancer by Mueller polrimetric imaging. Opt.Exp. 2011;(19):1582–1593.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
18. Ushenko A, Pishak V. Laser Polarimetry of Biological Tissue: Principles and Applications. In: Tuchin V, ed. Handbook of Coherent-Domain Optical Methods: Biomedical Diagnostics, Environmental and Material Science. 2004. pp. 93–138.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
19. Angelsky O, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y, Pishak V, Peresunko A. Statistical, Correlation and Topological Approaches in Diagnostics of the Structure and Physiological State of Birefringent Biological Tissues. Handbook of Photonics for Biomedical Science. 2010. pp. 283–322.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
20. Borovkova M, Peyvasteh M, Ushenko Y, Dubolazov O., Ushenko Y., Ushenko V., Bykov A et al. Complementary analysis of Muller-matrix images of optically anisotropic highly scattering biological tissues, J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2018; 14: 20
- View Article
- Google Scholar
21. Angelsky O, Tomka Y, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y, Yermolenko S. 2-D tomography of biotissue images in pre-clinic diagnostics of their pre-cancer states. Proc. SPIE 5972; 2005. pp. 158–162.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
22. Angelsky O, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y. Investigation of the correlation structure of biological tissue polarization images during the diagnostics of their oncological changes. Phys. Med. Biol. 2005;50(20):4811–4822. pmid:16204874
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
23. Ushenko Y, Ushenko V, Dubolazov A, Balanetskaya V, Zabolotna N. Mueller-matrix diagnostics of optical properties of polycrystalline networks of human blood plasma. Opt.Spectrosc. 2012;112(6):884–892.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Ushenko V, Dubolazov O, Karachevtsev A. Two wavelength Mueller matrix reconstruction of blood plasma films polycrystalline structure in diagnostics of breast cancer. Appl. Opt. 2014;53(10):B128. pmid:24787195
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
25. Ushenko Y, Koval G, Ushenko A, Dubolazov O, Ushenko V, Novakovskaia O. Mueller-matrix of laser-induced autofluorescence of polycrystalline films of dried peritoneal fluid in diagnostics of endometriosis. J. Biomed. Opt. 2016;21(7):071116.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
26. Ushenko A, Dubolazov A, Ushenko V, Novakovskaya O. Statistical analysis of polarization-inhomogeneous Fourier spectra of laser radiation scattered by human skin in the tasks of differentiation of benign and malignant formations. J. Biomed. Opt. 2016;21(7):071110.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
27. Prysyazhnyuk V, Ushenko Y, Dubolazov A, Ushenko A, Ushenko V. Polarization-dependent laser autofluorescence of the polycrystalline networks of blood plasma films in the task of liver pathology differentiation. Appl. Opt. 2016;55(12):B126. pmid:27140117
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
28. Ushenko V, Pavlyukovich N, Trifonyuk L. Spatial-Frequency Azimuthally Stable Cartography of Biological Polycrystalline Networks. International Journal of Optics. 2013; 2013:1–7.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
29. Pérez-Cárceles M, Noguera J, Jiménez J, Martínez P, Luna A, Osuna E. Diagnostic efficacy of biochemical markers in diagnosis post-mortem of ischaemic heart disease. Forensic Science International. 2004;142(1):1–7. pmid:15110067
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
30. Martínez Díaz F, Rodríguez-Morlensín M, Pérez-Cárceles M, Noguera J, Luna A, Osuna E. Biochemical analysis and immunohistochemical determination of cardiac troponin for the postmortem diagnosis of myocardial damage. Histology and Histopathology. 2005;20(2):475–481. pmid:15736052
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
31. Azzam R. Propagation of partially polarized light through anisotropic media with or without depolarization: A differential 4 x 4 matrix calculus. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 1978;68(12):1756.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
32. Jones R. A New Calculus for the Treatment of Optical Systems VII Properties of the N-Matrices. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 1948;38(8):671.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
33. Ortega-Quijano N, Arce-Diego J. Mueller matrix differential decomposition. Optics Letters. 2011;36(10):1942–1944. pmid:21593943
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Devlaminck V. Physical model of differential Mueller matrix for depolarizing uniform media. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A. 2013;30(11):2196.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
35. Ossikovski R, Devlaminck V. General criterion for the physical reliability of the differential Mueller matrix. Opt. Lett. 2014;39(5):1216. pmid:24690710
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
36. Devlaminck V, Ossikovski R. Uniqueness of the differential Mueller matrix of uniform homogeneous media. Opt Lett. 2014;39(11):3149. pmid:24875999
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
37. Ossikovski R, Arteaga O. Statistical meaning of the differential Mueller matrix of depolarizing homogeneous media. Opt. Lett. 2014;39(15):4470. pmid:25078205
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
38. Ossikovski R. Differential matrix formalism for depolarizing anisotropic media. Opt. Lett. 2011; 36(12):2330. pmid:21686010
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
39. Agarwal N, Yoon J, Garcia-Caurel E, Novikova T, Vanel JC, Pierangelo A et al. Spatial evolution of depolarization in homogeneous turbid media within the differential Mueller matrix formalism, Opt. Lett. 2015; 40: 5634. pmid:26625069
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
40. Cassidy L. Basic Concepts of Statistical Analysis for Surgical Research. Journal of Surgical Research. 2005;128(2):199–206. pmid:16140341
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
41. Davis CS. Statistical methods of the analysis of repeated measurements. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002.
42. Petrie A, Sabin C. Medical statistics at a glance. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.

[ref1] 1. Tuchin V, Wang L, Zimnjakov D. Optical polarization in biomedical applications. New York, USA: Springer; 2006.

[ref2] 2. Ghosh N, Wood M, Vitkin A. Polarized light assessment of complex turbid media such as biological tissues via Mueller matrix decomposition. In: Tuchin V, editors. Handbook of Photonics for Biomedical Science. London: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2010. pp. 253–282.

[ref3] 3. Jacques S. Polarized light imaging of biological tissues. In: Boas D, Pitris C, Ramanujam N, editors. Handbook of Biomedical Optics. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press; 2011. pp. 649–669.

[ref4] 4. Ghosh N. Tissue polarimetry: concepts, challenges, applications, and outlook. J. Biomed. Opt. 2011;16(11):110801. pmid:22112102
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[5] View Article

[6] PubMed/NCBI

[7] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Layden D, Ghosh N, Vitkin A. Quantitative polarimetry for tissue characterization and diagnosis. In: Wang R, Tuchin V, editors. Advanced Biophotonics: Tissue Optical Sectioning. Boca Raton, London, New York: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2013. pp. 73–108.

[ref6] 6. Vo-Dinh T. Biomedical photonics handbook: 3 volume set. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014.

[ref7] 7. Vitkin A, Ghosh N, Martino A. Tissue polarimetry. In: Andrews D, editors. Photonics: Scientific Foundations, Technology and Applications. 4th ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2015. pp. 239–321.

[ref8] 8. Kuzmin VL, Meglinski I. Coherent multiple scattering effects and Monte Carlo method. JETP Letters, 2004; 79(3):109–112
View Article
Google Scholar

[12] View Article

[13] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Kuzmin VL, Meglinski I. Coherent effects of multiple scattering for scalar and electromagnetic fields: Monte-Carlo simulation and Milne-like solutions. Opt. Commun. 2007; 273(2):307–310
View Article
Google Scholar

[15] View Article

[16] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Doronin A, Macdonald C, Meglinski I. Propagation of coherent polarized light in turbid highly scattering medium. J. Biomed. Opt. 2014;19(2):025005. pmid:24556700
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[18] View Article

[19] PubMed/NCBI

[20] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Doronin A, Radosevich A, Backman V, Meglinski I. Two electric field Monte Carlo models of coherent backscattering of polarized light. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 2014;31(11):2394.
View Article
Google Scholar

[22] View Article

[23] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Gopinathan PA, Kokila G, Jyothi M, Ananjan C, Pradeep L, and Nazir SH. Study of Collagen Birefringence in Different Grades of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma Using Picrosirius Red and Polarized Light Microscopy. Scientifica.2015; 2015:802980. pmid:26587310
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[25] View Article

[26] PubMed/NCBI

[27] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Kunnen B, Macdonald C, Doronin A, Jacques S, Eccles M, and Meglinski I. Application of circularly polarized light for non-invasive diagnosis of cancerous tissues and turbid tissue-like scattering media, J. Biophoton. 2015; 8(4):317–323
View Article
Google Scholar

[29] View Article

[30] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Meglinski I, Macdonald C, Doronin A, and Eccles M. Screening cancer aggressiveness by using circularly polarized light”, in: Optics in the Life Sciences, OSA Technical Digest (Optical Society of America), 2013; paper BM2A.4.

[ref15] 15. Rich L and Whittaker P. Collagen and picrosirius red staining: a polarized light assessement of fibrillar hue and spatial distribution. Braz. J.Morphol. Sci. 2005; 22:97–104.
View Article
Google Scholar

[33] View Article

[34] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Bancelin S, Nazac A, Ibrahim BH, Dokládal P, Decencière E, Teig B et. al. Determination of collagen fiber orientation in histological slides using Mueller microscopy and validation by second harmonic generation imaging. Opt.Exp. 2014;22(19):22561–22574
View Article
Google Scholar

[36] View Article

[37] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Pierengelo A, Benali A, Antonelli MR, Novikova T, Validire P, Gayet B et. аl. Ex-vivo characterization of human colon cancer by Mueller polrimetric imaging. Opt.Exp. 2011;(19):1582–1593.
View Article
Google Scholar

[39] View Article

[40] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Ushenko A, Pishak V. Laser Polarimetry of Biological Tissue: Principles and Applications. In: Tuchin V, ed. Handbook of Coherent-Domain Optical Methods: Biomedical Diagnostics, Environmental and Material Science. 2004. pp. 93–138.
View Article
Google Scholar

[42] View Article

[43] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Angelsky O, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y, Pishak V, Peresunko A. Statistical, Correlation and Topological Approaches in Diagnostics of the Structure and Physiological State of Birefringent Biological Tissues. Handbook of Photonics for Biomedical Science. 2010. pp. 283–322.
View Article
Google Scholar

[45] View Article

[46] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Borovkova M, Peyvasteh M, Ushenko Y, Dubolazov O., Ushenko Y., Ushenko V., Bykov A et al. Complementary analysis of Muller-matrix images of optically anisotropic highly scattering biological tissues, J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2018; 14: 20
View Article
Google Scholar

[48] View Article

[49] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Angelsky O, Tomka Y, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y, Yermolenko S. 2-D tomography of biotissue images in pre-clinic diagnostics of their pre-cancer states. Proc. SPIE 5972; 2005. pp. 158–162.
View Article
Google Scholar

[51] View Article

[52] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Angelsky O, Ushenko A, Ushenko Y. Investigation of the correlation structure of biological tissue polarization images during the diagnostics of their oncological changes. Phys. Med. Biol. 2005;50(20):4811–4822. pmid:16204874
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[54] View Article

[55] PubMed/NCBI

[56] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Ushenko Y, Ushenko V, Dubolazov A, Balanetskaya V, Zabolotna N. Mueller-matrix diagnostics of optical properties of polycrystalline networks of human blood plasma. Opt.Spectrosc. 2012;112(6):884–892.
View Article
Google Scholar

[58] View Article

[59] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Ushenko V, Dubolazov O, Karachevtsev A. Two wavelength Mueller matrix reconstruction of blood plasma films polycrystalline structure in diagnostics of breast cancer. Appl. Opt. 2014;53(10):B128. pmid:24787195
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[61] View Article

[62] PubMed/NCBI

[63] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Ushenko Y, Koval G, Ushenko A, Dubolazov O, Ushenko V, Novakovskaia O. Mueller-matrix of laser-induced autofluorescence of polycrystalline films of dried peritoneal fluid in diagnostics of endometriosis. J. Biomed. Opt. 2016;21(7):071116.
View Article
Google Scholar

[65] View Article

[66] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Ushenko A, Dubolazov A, Ushenko V, Novakovskaya O. Statistical analysis of polarization-inhomogeneous Fourier spectra of laser radiation scattered by human skin in the tasks of differentiation of benign and malignant formations. J. Biomed. Opt. 2016;21(7):071110.
View Article
Google Scholar

[68] View Article

[69] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Prysyazhnyuk V, Ushenko Y, Dubolazov A, Ushenko A, Ushenko V. Polarization-dependent laser autofluorescence of the polycrystalline networks of blood plasma films in the task of liver pathology differentiation. Appl. Opt. 2016;55(12):B126. pmid:27140117
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[71] View Article

[72] PubMed/NCBI

[73] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Ushenko V, Pavlyukovich N, Trifonyuk L. Spatial-Frequency Azimuthally Stable Cartography of Biological Polycrystalline Networks. International Journal of Optics. 2013; 2013:1–7.
View Article
Google Scholar

[75] View Article

[76] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Pérez-Cárceles M, Noguera J, Jiménez J, Martínez P, Luna A, Osuna E. Diagnostic efficacy of biochemical markers in diagnosis post-mortem of ischaemic heart disease. Forensic Science International. 2004;142(1):1–7. pmid:15110067
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[78] View Article

[79] PubMed/NCBI

[80] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Martínez Díaz F, Rodríguez-Morlensín M, Pérez-Cárceles M, Noguera J, Luna A, Osuna E. Biochemical analysis and immunohistochemical determination of cardiac troponin for the postmortem diagnosis of myocardial damage. Histology and Histopathology. 2005;20(2):475–481. pmid:15736052
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[82] View Article

[83] PubMed/NCBI

[84] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. Azzam R. Propagation of partially polarized light through anisotropic media with or without depolarization: A differential 4 x 4 matrix calculus. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 1978;68(12):1756.
View Article
Google Scholar

[86] View Article

[87] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Jones R. A New Calculus for the Treatment of Optical Systems VII Properties of the N-Matrices. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 1948;38(8):671.
View Article
Google Scholar

[89] View Article

[90] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Ortega-Quijano N, Arce-Diego J. Mueller matrix differential decomposition. Optics Letters. 2011;36(10):1942–1944. pmid:21593943
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[92] View Article

[93] PubMed/NCBI

[94] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Devlaminck V. Physical model of differential Mueller matrix for depolarizing uniform media. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A. 2013;30(11):2196.
View Article
Google Scholar

[96] View Article

[97] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Ossikovski R, Devlaminck V. General criterion for the physical reliability of the differential Mueller matrix. Opt. Lett. 2014;39(5):1216. pmid:24690710
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[99] View Article

[100] PubMed/NCBI

[101] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Devlaminck V, Ossikovski R. Uniqueness of the differential Mueller matrix of uniform homogeneous media. Opt Lett. 2014;39(11):3149. pmid:24875999
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[103] View Article

[104] PubMed/NCBI

[105] Google Scholar

[ref37] 37. Ossikovski R, Arteaga O. Statistical meaning of the differential Mueller matrix of depolarizing homogeneous media. Opt. Lett. 2014;39(15):4470. pmid:25078205
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[107] View Article

[108] PubMed/NCBI

[109] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Ossikovski R. Differential matrix formalism for depolarizing anisotropic media. Opt. Lett. 2011; 36(12):2330. pmid:21686010
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[111] View Article

[112] PubMed/NCBI

[113] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Agarwal N, Yoon J, Garcia-Caurel E, Novikova T, Vanel JC, Pierangelo A et al. Spatial evolution of depolarization in homogeneous turbid media within the differential Mueller matrix formalism, Opt. Lett. 2015; 40: 5634. pmid:26625069
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[115] View Article

[116] PubMed/NCBI

[117] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Cassidy L. Basic Concepts of Statistical Analysis for Surgical Research. Journal of Surgical Research. 2005;128(2):199–206. pmid:16140341
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[119] View Article

[120] PubMed/NCBI

[121] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Davis CS. Statistical methods of the analysis of repeated measurements. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002.

[ref42] 42. Petrie A, Sabin C. Medical statistics at a glance. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Method and materials

Basic equations and theoretical remarks

Experimental method

Analysis of Mueller-matrix elements

Results and discussion

Samples, preparation and statistical validation

Mueller-matrix mapping of biological tissues histological sections

Statistical analysis

Method of polarization microscopy.

Method of polarization-phase imaging.

Conclusions

References