Table 6.

Comparison between different imaging modalities for burn assessment

Imaging Modalities	Invasive	Contact	Cost	Critical post-burn assessment time	Accuracy of clinical trials (in ideal scenarios)	Limitation
Biopsy and histology	Yes		Low	Immediate	~100%	Diagnosis subjected to observer; can’t monitor burn depth change over time
LDI	No	No	High	~48 hours	~100%	Non-tolerant to patient movement, strong ambient light, body curvature or existence of tissue abnormalities and topical substance
Thermography	No	No	Low	Within 3 days	~90%	Non-tolerant to ambient heat disturbance; Time sensitive
Vital dyes	Yes	No	Low	A few hours	~100%	Side effects of the vital dyes; Non-tolerant to topical substance
Videomicroscopy	No	Yes	Low	~24 hours	90–100%	Small observation area
OPSI	No	Yes	Low	N/A	>75%	Over-sensitive to small change; Small observation area; Long scan time
RCM	No	Yes	High	Immediate	N/A	Long sampling time; Small observation area
MSI	No	No	Depends on customized device	Immediate	79%–86%	Difficult to interpret results; Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth
OCT	No	No	High	N/A	N/A	Limited penetration depth; small observation area
NIRS	No	No	Depends on customized device	Within 1–3 hours	N/A	Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth
Terahertz imaging	No	No	Depends on customized device	As early as 1 hour	N/A	Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth
Ultrasound	No	Yes (conventional) No (non-contact)	Low	Immediate	>90%	Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth
LSI	No	No	High	As early as 0–24 hours	Comparable to LDI	Unresolved theoretical and practical problems
SFDI	No	No	Depends on customized device	From 10 minutes to 72 hours, depending on test subject and parameters	N/A	Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth
Photoacoustic imaging	No	No	Depends on customized device	Immediate	N/A	Small observation area; Lack of standardization in quantifying burn depth