ReviewExperimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.)2022
Imaging and detection of long-lived fluorescence probes in presence of highly emissive and scattering background.
Review in Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Luminescence of NLuminescence : the journal of biological and chemical luminescence · 2026Article
- An update on recent advances in fluorescent materials for fluorescence molecular imaging: a review.RSC advances · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optical biomedical imaging and diagnostics is a rapidly growing field that provides both structural and functional information with uses ranging from fundamental to practical clinical applications. Nevertheless, imaging/visualizing fluorescence objects with high spatial resolution in a highly scattering and emissive biological medium continues to be a significant challenge. A fundamental limiting factor for imaging technologies is the signal-to-background ratio (SBR). For a long time to improve the SBR, we tried to improve the brightness of fluorescence probes. Many novel fluorophores with improved brightness (almost reaching the theoretical limit), redshifted emission, highly improved photostability, and biocompatibility greatly helped advance fluorescence detection and imaging. However, autofluorescence, scattering of excitation light, and Raman scattering remain fundamental limiting problems that drastically limit detection sensitivity. Similarly, significant efforts were focused on reducing the background. High-quality sample purification eliminates the majority of autofluorescence background and in a limited confocal volume allows detection to reach the ultimate sensitivity to a single molecule. However, detection and imaging in physiological conditions does not allow for any sample (cells or tissue) purification, forcing us to face a fundamental limitation. A significant improvement in limiting background can be achieved when fluorophores with a long fluorescence lifetime are used, and time-gated detection is applied. However, all long-lived fluorophores present low brightness, limiting the potential improvement. We recently proposed to utilize multipulse excitation (burst of pulses) to enhance the relative signal of long-lived fluorophores and significantly improve the SBR. Herein, we present results obtained with multipulse excitation and compare them with standard single-pulse excitation. Subtraction of images obtained with a single pulse from those obtained with pulse burst (differential image) highly limits background and instrumental noise resulting in more specific/sensitive detection and allows to achieve greater imaging depth in highly scattering media, including skin and tissue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.