24 February 2010 Optimal pupil design for confocal microscopy
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Confocal reflectance microscopy may enable screening and diagnosis of skin cancers noninvasively and in real-time, as an adjunct to biopsy and pathology. Current instruments are large, complex, and expensive. A simpler, confocal line-scanning microscope may accelerate the translation of confocal microscopy in clinical and surgical dermatology. A confocal reflectance microscope may use a beamsplitter, transmitting and detecting through the pupil, or a divided pupil, or theta configuration, with half used for transmission and half for detection. The divided pupil may offer better sectioning and contrast. We present a Fourier optics model and compare the on-axis irradiance of a confocal point-scanning microscope in both pupil configurations, optimizing the profile of a Gaussian beam in a circular or semicircular aperture. We repeat both calculations with a cylindrical lens which focuses the source to a line. The variable parameter is the fillfactor, h, the ratio of the 1/e2 diameter of the Gaussian beam to the diameter of the full aperture. The optimal values of h, for point scanning are 0.90 (full) and 0.66 for the half-aperture. For line-scanning, the fill-factors are 1.02 (full) and 0.52 (half). Additional parameters to consider are the optimal location of the point-source beam in the divided-pupil configuration, the optimal line width for the line-source, and the width of the aperture in the divided-pupil configuration. Additional figures of merit are field-of-view and sectioning. Use of optimal designs is critical in comparing the experimental performance of the different configurations.
© (2010) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Yogesh G. Patel, Milind Rajadhyaksha, Charles A. DiMarzio, "Optimal pupil design for confocal microscopy", Proc. SPIE 7570, Three-Dimensional and Multidimensional Microscopy: Image Acquisition and Processing XVII, 75700P (24 February 2010); doi: 10.1117/12.842862; https://doi.org/10.1117/12.842862
PROCEEDINGS
9 PAGES


SHARE
Back to Top