case_images: PMC11444973_01
case_images: NIR imaging of the PAD patient and control. NIR-II images of the feet of the PAD patient at (A) 2 min 30 s and (B) 5 min. NIR-II images of the feet of the control at (C) 2 min 30 s and (D) 5 min. (E) NIR-II image of the right calf of the PAD patient at 5 min 10 s. (F) NIR-II image of the feet of the PAD patient at 10 min. NIR-II images of the (G) left foot and (H) right foot of the control at 5 min 10 s. NIR-I images of the feet of the PAD patient at (I) 2 min 30 s and (J) 5 min. NIR-I images of the (K) left foot and (L) right foot of the control at 5 min 10 s. (M) SBR of the left foot and right foot of the control under NIR-I and NIR-II imaging at 5 min 10 s. (N) The diagram of NIR imaging. Yellow arrow: the arcus venosus dorsalis pedis of the two participants. Orange rectangle: microvessel imaging in the left hallux of the PAD patient showed that the blood flow had almost disappeared. Green arrow: the great saphenous vein of the PAD patient. Red arrow: NIR-II imaging could detect microvessels of the control that NIR-I could not.
case_images: fcvm-11-1460708-g001.jpg
case_images: PMC11444973_02_fcvm-11-1460708-g001.jpg
case_images: F1
case_images: During NIR-II imaging, fluorescence images of the PAD patient (Figures 1A,B) and the control (Figures 1C,D) were captured at 2 min 30 s and 5 min, respectively. At 5 min 10 s, we observed the fluorescence image of the right calf of the PAD patient (Figure 1E) and found that the great saphenous vein (green arrow) continued with the dorsalis pedis vein. At 10 min, we observed that the fluorescence signal of the PAD patient had decreased significantly (Figure 1F). At 5 min 10 s, we captured fluorescence images of the left foot (Figure 1G) and the right foot (Figure 1H) of the control, showing that a larger range of fluorescence signals in the dorsal foot could be observed by imaging with one foot. NIR-I imaging, we observed that the resolution of imaging in the PAD patient at 2 min 30 s (Figure 1I) and 5 min (Figure 1J) was not as good as that of the resolution of NIR-II imaging at the corresponding times (Figures 1A,B). NIR-I fluorescence images of the left foot (Figure 1K) and the right foot (Figure 1L) of the control were captured at 5 min 10 s, respectively. NIR-II imaging (left foot: 3.6, right foot: 3.8) was higher than that of NIR-I imaging (left foot: 2.4, right foot: 2.1) within the ROI (Figure 1M). NIR-II and NIR-I images of one foot of the PAD patient at 5 min 10 s are shown in Supplementary Figures S2A,B. The diagram of NIR imaging is shown in Figure 1N.
case_images: PMC11444973_02
case_images: NIR imaging of the PAD patient and control. NIR-II images of the feet of the PAD patient at (A) 2 min 30 s and (B) 5 min. NIR-II images of the feet of the control at (C) 2 min 30 s and (D) 5 min. (E) NIR-II image of the right calf of the PAD patient at 5 min 10 s. (F) NIR-II image of the feet of the PAD patient at 10 min. NIR-II images of the (G) left foot and (H) right foot of the control at 5 min 10 s. NIR-I images of the feet of the PAD patient at (I) 2 min 30 s and (J) 5 min. NIR-I images of the (K) left foot and (L) right foot of the control at 5 min 10 s. (M) SBR of the left foot and right foot of the control under NIR-I and NIR-II imaging at 5 min 10 s. (N) The diagram of NIR imaging. Yellow arrow: the arcus venosus dorsalis pedis of the two participants. Orange rectangle: microvessel imaging in the left hallux of the PAD patient showed that the blood flow had almost disappeared. Green arrow: the great saphenous vein of the PAD patient. Red arrow: NIR-II imaging could detect microvessels of the control that NIR-I could not.
case_images: fcvm-11-1460708-g001.jpg
case_images: PMC11444973_02_fcvm-11-1460708-g001.jpg
case_images: F1
case_images: During NIR-II imaging, fluorescence images of the PAD patient (Figures 1A,B) and the control (Figures 1C,D) were captured at 2 min 30 s and 5 min, respectively. At 5 min 10 s, we observed the fluorescence image of the right calf of the PAD patient (Figure 1E) and found that the great saphenous vein (green arrow) continued with the dorsalis pedis vein. At 10 min, we observed that the fluorescence signal of the PAD patient had decreased significantly (Figure 1F). At 5 min 10 s, we captured fluorescence images of the left foot (Figure 1G) and the right foot (Figure 1H) of the control, showing that a larger range of fluorescence signals in the dorsal foot could be observed by imaging with one foot. NIR-I imaging, we observed that the resolution of imaging in the PAD patient at 2 min 30 s (Figure 1I) and 5 min (Figure 1J) was not as good as that of the resolution of NIR-II imaging at the corresponding times (Figures 1A,B). NIR-I fluorescence images of the left foot (Figure 1K) and the right foot (Figure 1L) of the control were captured at 5 min 10 s, respectively. NIR-II imaging (left foot: 3.6, right foot: 3.8) was higher than that of NIR-I imaging (left foot: 2.4, right foot: 2.1) within the ROI (Figure 1M). NIR-II and NIR-I images of one foot of the PAD patient at 5 min 10 s are shown in Supplementary Figures S2A,B. The diagram of NIR imaging is shown in Figure 1N.
case_images: OCTA images in the PAD patient and the control at imaging depths of 300-1,000 mum. (A) The left foot of the PAD patient. (B) The right foot of the PAD patient. (C) The left foot of the control. (D) The right foot of the control. Scale bar = 100 um.
case_images: fcvm-11-1460708-g002.jpg
case_images: PMC11444973_02_fcvm-11-1460708-g002.jpg
case_images: F2
case_images: NIR-II imaging (left foot: 3.6, right foot: 3.8) was higher than that of NIR-I imaging (left foot: 2.4, right foot: 2.1) within the ROI (Figure 1M). NIR-II and NIR-I images of one foot of the PAD patient at 5 min 10 s are shown in Supplementary Figures S2A,B. Figure S2C). Furthermore, the SBR of the PAD patient was lower than the corresponding SBR of the control. At an imaging depth of 300-1,000 um, by comparing the images of the left foot (Figure 2A) and right foot (Figure 2B) of the PAD patient with those of the left foot (Figure 2C) and right foot (Figure 2D) of the control, we found that the microvessels in the OCTA images of the control were more densely distributed and larger in diameter.
case_images: LSFG of the PAD patient and the control. (A) LSFG images of the left foot of the PAD patient. (B) LSFG images of the right foot of the PAD patient. (C) LSFG images of the left foot of the control. (D) LSFG images of the right foot of the control. (E) Mean perfusion of each foot of the two participants. (F) Mean intensity of each foot of the two participants. The color bar represents perfusion levels, from blue (low) to red (high). ROIs are framed with rectangles.
case_images: fcvm-11-1460708-g003.jpg
case_images: PMC11444973_02_fcvm-11-1460708-g003.jpg
case_images: F3
case_images: Tmax of both feet was shorter in the control (left foot: 30.7 s, right foot: 42.3 s) (Supplementary Figure S3B). By comparing the gray images and pseudocolor images of the two participants, we found that the perfusion level and intensity of the left foot (Figure 3A) of the PAD patient were lower than those of the right foot (Figure 3B). The perfusion levels of the left foot (Figure 3C) and the right foot (Figure 3D) of the control were almost the same, and both were higher than those of the PAD patient. The mean perfusion of the left foot of the PAD patient was 156.44, which was lower than 178.66 in the right foot. The mean perfusion of the left foot and the right foot of the control was 198.68 and 191.80, respectively (Figure 3E), higher than that of the PAD patient, reflecting the consistency between the perfusion volume of the dorsal foot and the degree of PAD lesions. However, the mean intensity of the right foot of the control was 44.20, which was lower than 45.67 of the PAD patient (Figure 3F).