Difference between revisions of "IHERO UseCase 2011 AaronPhillips"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
| − | ==1. Proposed Workitem: Reference point transfer | + | ==1. Proposed Workitem: CT study with Reference point transfer |
* Proposal Editor: Aaron Phillips, aaron.phillips@midcentral.co.nz, 646-350-8434 | * Proposal Editor: Aaron Phillips, aaron.phillips@midcentral.co.nz, 646-350-8434 | ||
| − | * Editor: | + | * Editor: Nick Linton, nick.linton@elekta.com, 613 254-8725 |
| − | * Date: | + | * Date: 26 Mar 2011(Wiki keeps history) |
| − | * Version: | + | * Version: 1.0 (Wiki keeps history) |
* Domain: ''Radiation Oncology'' | * Domain: ''Radiation Oncology'' | ||
[[Category:RO]] | [[Category:RO]] | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==2. The Problem== | ==2. The Problem== | ||
| − | + | A> The reference (marker) points created in Siemens syngo Dosimetrist do not transfer to CMS Monaco. | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | B> CMS XiO does not export CT study Date & Time (causing warning/error messages) to Siemens syngo RTT. | |
==3. Key Use Case== | ==3. Key Use Case== | ||
| + | A> Transfer of Points with CT study | ||
| + | 1. The User defines reference points on CT study during CT localization (or CT simulation) workflow | ||
| + | 1a. Marker points are defined on CT study at patient (skin) surface | ||
| + | 1b. A co-ordinate system reference point is defined at the intersection of these markers. | ||
| + | 1c. The User mars the patient surface (typically with tattoos) to indicate these marker point locations. | ||
| + | 1d. A point (or mutliple points) is (are) defined as beam isocenter(s) | ||
| + | 1e. A point (or multiple) are defined as points of anatomical interest (for possible subsequent dose calculation in RTP system) | ||
| + | 2. The User exports the CT study with the defined (Markers, Reference, Interest) Points | ||
| + | 2a. From CT localization (or Virtual simulation) to RTP system; or/ | ||
| + | 2b. From CT localization (or Virtual Simulation) to Treatment Management System (Oncology Information System) as possible Action points during treatment; and/ | ||
| + | 2c. From RTP system to Treatment Management System & subsequent (patient data) DICOM RT archive. | ||
| − | + | Instance: | |
| + | - User creates a treatment plan in CMS Monaco | ||
| + | - No patient reference point is seen (imported with the CT study) | ||
| + | - Issue: It is difficult to transfer & verify the plan geometry to the actual patient and their tattoos (reference marks) as there is no relative position from Monaco available. | ||
| + | |||
| + | B> Transfer of Date & Time: | ||
| + | - For every patient imaging fraction on syngo RTT the User receives a warning that there may be data inconsistencies as no Date & Time is available in the reference data set (CTs from XiO). | ||
| + | - If there are multiple reference data sets for multiple treatment phases (courses) or for offline Adaptive RT then it is difficult if not impossible to confirm which dataset should be used as a reference. | ||
| + | - Date & Time information must be made available - quite dangerous. | ||
==4. Standards & Systems== | ==4. Standards & Systems== | ||
| − | + | Systems: | |
| − | + | A> Siemens Syngo Dosimetrist & CMS Monaco | |
| − | + | B> CMS XiO and Siemens Syngo RTT | |
| − | + | Standards: | |
| + | DICOM RT objects (DICOM RT PLAN, RT Stucture Set, FOR, Image Modality CT) | ||
==5. Discussion== | ==5. Discussion== | ||
Revision as of 14:43, 26 March 2011
==1. Proposed Workitem: CT study with Reference point transfer
- Proposal Editor: Aaron Phillips, aaron.phillips@midcentral.co.nz, 646-350-8434
- Editor: Nick Linton, nick.linton@elekta.com, 613 254-8725
- Date: 26 Mar 2011(Wiki keeps history)
- Version: 1.0 (Wiki keeps history)
- Domain: Radiation Oncology
2. The Problem
A> The reference (marker) points created in Siemens syngo Dosimetrist do not transfer to CMS Monaco.
B> CMS XiO does not export CT study Date & Time (causing warning/error messages) to Siemens syngo RTT.
3. Key Use Case
A> Transfer of Points with CT study 1. The User defines reference points on CT study during CT localization (or CT simulation) workflow 1a. Marker points are defined on CT study at patient (skin) surface 1b. A co-ordinate system reference point is defined at the intersection of these markers. 1c. The User mars the patient surface (typically with tattoos) to indicate these marker point locations. 1d. A point (or mutliple points) is (are) defined as beam isocenter(s) 1e. A point (or multiple) are defined as points of anatomical interest (for possible subsequent dose calculation in RTP system) 2. The User exports the CT study with the defined (Markers, Reference, Interest) Points 2a. From CT localization (or Virtual simulation) to RTP system; or/ 2b. From CT localization (or Virtual Simulation) to Treatment Management System (Oncology Information System) as possible Action points during treatment; and/ 2c. From RTP system to Treatment Management System & subsequent (patient data) DICOM RT archive.
Instance: - User creates a treatment plan in CMS Monaco - No patient reference point is seen (imported with the CT study) - Issue: It is difficult to transfer & verify the plan geometry to the actual patient and their tattoos (reference marks) as there is no relative position from Monaco available.
B> Transfer of Date & Time: - For every patient imaging fraction on syngo RTT the User receives a warning that there may be data inconsistencies as no Date & Time is available in the reference data set (CTs from XiO). - If there are multiple reference data sets for multiple treatment phases (courses) or for offline Adaptive RT then it is difficult if not impossible to confirm which dataset should be used as a reference. - Date & Time information must be made available - quite dangerous.
4. Standards & Systems
Systems: A> Siemens Syngo Dosimetrist & CMS Monaco B> CMS XiO and Siemens Syngo RTT Standards: DICOM RT objects (DICOM RT PLAN, RT Stucture Set, FOR, Image Modality CT)
5. Discussion
<Include additional discussion or consider a few details which might be useful for the detailed proposal>
- <Why IHE would be a good venue to solve the problem and what you think IHE should do to solve it.>
- <What might the IHE technical approach be? Existing Actors? New Transactions? Additional Profiles?>
- <What are some of the risks or open issues to be addressed?>