Paperdoi:10.1364/BOE.9.004306

Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements

Venue listed2018Added Oct 29, 2026

  • CD
  • BL
  • CC
  • AB
  • BC
  • I

Authors: Cody E. Dunn, Ben S. Lertsakdadet, Christian Crouzet, Adrian Bahani, Bernard Choi (University of California, Irvine)

Biomedical Optics Express 9(9):4306, 2018

TL;DR

Monte Carlo simulations in an eight-layer skin model plus in vivo camera measurements compared speckle plethysmography (SPG) with PPG. Simulated pulsatile amplitude was 24 % (532 nm) and 40 % (860 nm) for SPG versus 5.6 % and 3.0 % for PPG, and both simulation and measurement point to a much larger signal-to-noise ratio for SPG. Unlike PPG, the SPG modulation grows at the longer near-infrared wavelength.

  • Form factor: camera

Abstract

Noncontact photoplethysmography (PPG) is limited by a poor signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). A solution to this limitation is the use of alternate sources of optical contrast to generate a complementary pulsatile waveform. One such source is laser speckle contrast, which is modulated in biological tissues by the flow rate of red blood cells. Averaging a region of interest from a speckle contrast image over time allows for the calculation of a speckleplethysmogram (SPG). Similar to PPG, SPG enables monitoring of heart rate and respiratory rate. A gap in the knowledge base exists as to the precise spatiotemporal relationship between PPG and SPG signals. We have developed an eight-layer tissue model to simulate both PPG and SPG signals in a reflectance geometry via Monte Carlo methods. We modeled PPG by compression of the upper and lower blood nets due to expansion of the larger arterial layer below. The in silico PPG peak-to-peak amplitude percent was greater at 532 nm than at 860 nm (5.6% vs. 3.0%, respectively), which matches trends from the literature. We modeled SPG by changing flow speeds of red blood cells in both the capillaries and arterioles over the cardiac cycle. The in silico SPG peak-to-peak amplitude percent was 24% at 532 nm and 40% at 860 nm. In silico results are similar to in vivo results measured with a two-camera set up for simultaneous imaging of PPG and SPG. Both in silico and in vivo data suggest SPG has a much larger SNR than PPG, which may prove beneficial for noncontact, wide-field optical monitoring of cardiovascular health.

Verbatim from Europe PMC (opens in a new tab) · Abstract via Europe PMC; © the authors/publisher

Results on ChatPPG leaderboards

All leaderboards

No results from this paper on ChatPPG leaderboards yet. Browse the leaderboards.

Tasks & signals

Keywords

Speckle PlethysmographyMonte CarloSnrReflectanceWavelengthUc Irvine

How it works

How Method works: Setup → Method → TargetSetup: Signals (SPG, PPG, imaging); Wavelengths (532 nm, 860 nm); Form factor (camera). Method: Method.SetupSignals: SPG, PPG, imagingSignalsSPG, PPG, imagingWavelengths: 532 nm, 860 nmWavelengths532 nm, 860 nmForm factor: cameraForm factorcameraMethodMethod
Wavelengths
532 nm, 860 nm

Cite this paper

Cite this paper with the fields recorded here. Check it against the publisher before submitting.

Dunn, C. E., Lertsakdadet, B. S., Crouzet, C., Bahani, A., & Choi, B. (2018). Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements. Biomedical Optics Express , 2018, 9(9), 4306. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.9.004306
Dunn, Cody E., Ben S. Lertsakdadet, Christian Crouzet, Adrian Bahani, and Bernard Choi. 2018. "Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements." Biomedical Optics Express , 2018 9 (9): 4306. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.9.004306.
Dunn, C. E., Lertsakdadet, B. S., Crouzet, C., Bahani, A. and Choi, B. (2018) 'Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements', Biomedical Optics Express , 2018, 9(9), p. 4306. doi: 10.1364/BOE.9.004306.
Dunn, Cody E., et al. "Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements." Biomedical Optics Express , 2018, vol. 9, no. 9, 2018, p. 4306. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.9.004306.
C. E. Dunn, B. S. Lertsakdadet, C. Crouzet, A. Bahani, and B. Choi, "Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements," Biomedical Optics Express , 2018, vol. 9, no. 9, p. 4306, 2018, doi: 10.1364/BOE.9.004306.
@article{dunn2018comparison,
  title         = {{Comparison of speckleplethysmographic (SPG) and photoplethysmographic (PPG) imaging by Monte Carlo simulations and in vivo measurements}},
  author        = {Dunn, Cody E. and Lertsakdadet, Ben S. and Crouzet, Christian and Bahani, Adrian and Choi, Bernard},
  year          = {2018},
  journal       = {Biomedical Optics Express , 2018},
  volume        = {9},
  number        = {9},
  pages         = {4306},
  doi           = {10.1364/BOE.9.004306}
}

Added to the ChatPPG research hub