Enhanced CT-MR Profile - Brief Proposal: Difference between revisions

From IHE Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Cor Loef (talk | contribs)
New page: 1. Proposed Profile: Enhanced MR/CT Image Proposal Editor: Cor Loef/Dick Donker Date: 2007-08-23 Version: 0.1 Domain: Radiology 2. The Problem The existing DICOM CT and MR objects needed a...
 
Kevino (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(5 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
1. Proposed Profile: Enhanced MR/CT Image
__NOTOC__
Proposal Editor: Cor Loef/Dick Donker
 
Date: 2007-08-23
==1. Proposed Profile: Enhanced MR/CT Image==
Version: 0.1
 
Domain: Radiology
* Proposal Editor: Cor Loef/Dick Donker
2. The Problem
* Date: 2007-08-23
The existing DICOM CT and MR objects needed a significant revision because of technology advancements in CT and MR technology, and new acquisition protocols. DICOM has published the specification for enhanced multi-frame MR and CT images, in 2003 and 2004.
* Version: 0.1
The creation of these new enhanced objects in CT and MR modalities in real products has started, and this requires storage in the PACS, and the consistent hanging and display on workstations for the multitude of clinical acquisition protocols supported by these objects.
* Domain: Radiology
There exists however a real risk that the various modality vendors will select a slightly different encoding in these complex objects for the same clinical setting, and consequently the workstation vendors will be confronted with these variations. This may well result in inconsistencies when hanging and displaying these objects for a certain clinical use case. Users will be annoyed by these unnecessary viewing differences, and interoperability is at risk.
 
A profile that specifies the necessary key encoding of critical concepts in the enhanced CT/MR objects for particular clinical use cases would greatly simplify the task of configuring hanging protocols during PACS and modality installation, and reduce the unnecessary and unwanted variance between sites.
==2. The Problem==
3. Key Use Case
 
The original DICOM CT, MR, XR, PET and US objects needed significant revision because of technology advancements, and new acquisition protocols. DICOM has published the specification for Enhanced Multi-frame MR (2003), CT (2004), XR (2006) and PET (2007).  US is expected in 2008.
 
Products have started creating and storing enhanced CT and MR objects.  This requires consistent hanging and display on workstations for the multitude of clinical acquisition protocols supported by these objects.
 
The encoding flexibility of these objects raises a real risk that modality vendors will select slightly different encodings for the same clinical use case, and consequently workstation vendors will be confronted with these variations. This may result in inconsistencies when hanging and displaying these objects. Users will be annoyed by unnecessary viewing differences, and interoperability is at risk.
 
A profile that specifies encoding of critical concepts for particular clinical use cases would greatly simplify the task of configuring hanging protocols during PACS and modality installation, and reduce the unnecessary and unwanted variance between sites.
 
==3. Key Use Case==
The Advanced CT/MR Taskforce has defined key clinical use cases for a demonstration at RSNA 2005:
The Advanced CT/MR Taskforce has defined key clinical use cases for a demonstration at RSNA 2005:
CT/MR CARDIAC IMAGING
* CT/MR CARDIAC IMAGING
New CT/MR cardiac images containing standard attributes for location and timing information.  
:New CT/MR cardiac images containing standard attributes for location and timing information.  
MR DIFFUSION
*MR DIFFUSION
MR diffusion images containing standard attributes for diffusion B values, direction and diffusion image type.
:MR diffusion images containing standard attributes for diffusion B values, direction and diffusion image type.
CT/MR CONTRAST PERFUSION
*CT/MR CONTRAST PERFUSION
Intra-venous contrast enhanced images containing standard attributes for timing and phase.  
:Intra-venous contrast enhanced images containing standard attributes for timing and phase.  
MULTI-STACK SPINE IMAGING
*MULTI-STACK SPINE IMAGING
Images are acquired at multiple disk space levels of the spine such that multiple slices at each level are parallel to the disk space, each in a separate stack from slices at different angles through other disks. These images are exchanged in an interoperable way with standard attributes describing the stacks and their geometries.
:Images are acquired at multiple disk space levels of the spine such that multiple slices at each level are parallel to the disk space, each in a separate stack from slices at different angles through other disks. These images are exchanged in an interoperable way with standard attributes describing the stacks and their geometries.
MR SPECTROSCOPY
*MR SPECTROSCOPY
Single-voxel, multi-voxel or multi-slice 1D MR spectra are exchanged with reference and metabolite images that contain information to allow correct display, post-processing and analysis.
:Single-voxel, multi-voxel or multi-slice 1D MR spectra are exchanged with reference and metabolite images that contain information to allow correct display, post-processing and analysis.
These use cases may constitute the basis for a new IHE CT/MR Image profile, which specifies for each all that are applicable of the following:
 
The required attributes (mostly already defined in the standard),  
==4. Standards & Systems==
The relevant functional grouping  
The systems involved are Acquisition Modalities, PACS, and Workstations (Display, Processing, Reporting).
The content of the dimension module  
 
The use of a Real World Values LUT  
The standards involved are the DICOM 2006: Enhanced MR Image, MR Spectroscopy, Enhanced CT Image, Enhanced XA/XRF, Enhanced PET objects and possibly the current US Supplement.
The use of a Supplemental Color LUT  
 
The relevant attributes for display on a workstation
==5. Discussion==
4. Standards & Systems
 
The systems involved are the Acquisition Modality, Image Manager/Archive and the Image Display.
These use cases may constitute the basis for one or more new Image Content profiles, which specifies, as applicable:
The standards involved are the DICOM 2006: Enhanced MR Image, MR Spectroscopy and Enhanced CT Image (multi-frame) objects.
:*The required attributes (mostly already defined in the standard),  
5. Discussion
:*The relevant functional grouping  
:*The content of the dimension module  
:*The use of a Real World Values LUT  
:*The use of a Supplemental Color LUT  
:*The relevant attributes for display on a workstation
 
A key decision will be how many of the new objects to address this year.
 
The NEMA Committee for the Advancement of DICOM would like to organize a first informal testing of this profile with systems that envisage or already give support for enhanced CT and MR objects at the January 2008 connectathon.
The NEMA Committee for the Advancement of DICOM would like to organize a first informal testing of this profile with systems that envisage or already give support for enhanced CT and MR objects at the January 2008 connectathon.
==Issues needing Addressing==
===Downgrading to Old Objects===
How should a PACS handle it if the modality provided Enhanced but a client needed old style.  Creation of the old objects is not so bad, and could be triggered based on the
SOPs in the association for the C-STORE.  The problem is that before the C-STORE there is probably a C-FIND and when you don't know what the client wants, how many series do you tell them there is.  One Enhanced, but if they want Old, there are many situations you
would want/need to split into multiple series.  Similar when they query for image instances.
: Realistically, I think that this would have to be done on the basis of the requesting AET, keeping a table in the SCP as to which AETs want "old" and which want "new" CT objects (or similarly for MR of course).  This could either be configured manually (yuk!), or perhaps better done by "trying" to negotiate the enhanced objects in each outgoing C-STORE operation...that way any upgrade of the client could automatically be updated as soon as t gets upgraded (well ONE query later in fact!)  Once the decision has been made, then splitting into series/images is '''probably''' not too difficult......if anyone would like to send me an example enhanced image would would benefit from splitting, then I'd happily give it a try - Dave Harvey
===Upgrading to New Objects===
Taking old objects and generating enhanced is even harder since there are required fields that would need to be filled and the necessary information is likely not present.
: I agree with previous suggestions that this is unlikely to be helpful or useful, and could set a dangerous precedent for bad image construction by primary producers who should be filling the data out properly!

Latest revision as of 03:37, 24 August 2007


1. Proposed Profile: Enhanced MR/CT Image

  • Proposal Editor: Cor Loef/Dick Donker
  • Date: 2007-08-23
  • Version: 0.1
  • Domain: Radiology

2. The Problem

The original DICOM CT, MR, XR, PET and US objects needed significant revision because of technology advancements, and new acquisition protocols. DICOM has published the specification for Enhanced Multi-frame MR (2003), CT (2004), XR (2006) and PET (2007). US is expected in 2008.

Products have started creating and storing enhanced CT and MR objects. This requires consistent hanging and display on workstations for the multitude of clinical acquisition protocols supported by these objects.

The encoding flexibility of these objects raises a real risk that modality vendors will select slightly different encodings for the same clinical use case, and consequently workstation vendors will be confronted with these variations. This may result in inconsistencies when hanging and displaying these objects. Users will be annoyed by unnecessary viewing differences, and interoperability is at risk.

A profile that specifies encoding of critical concepts for particular clinical use cases would greatly simplify the task of configuring hanging protocols during PACS and modality installation, and reduce the unnecessary and unwanted variance between sites.

3. Key Use Case

The Advanced CT/MR Taskforce has defined key clinical use cases for a demonstration at RSNA 2005:

  • CT/MR CARDIAC IMAGING
New CT/MR cardiac images containing standard attributes for location and timing information.
  • MR DIFFUSION
MR diffusion images containing standard attributes for diffusion B values, direction and diffusion image type.
  • CT/MR CONTRAST PERFUSION
Intra-venous contrast enhanced images containing standard attributes for timing and phase.
  • MULTI-STACK SPINE IMAGING
Images are acquired at multiple disk space levels of the spine such that multiple slices at each level are parallel to the disk space, each in a separate stack from slices at different angles through other disks. These images are exchanged in an interoperable way with standard attributes describing the stacks and their geometries.
  • MR SPECTROSCOPY
Single-voxel, multi-voxel or multi-slice 1D MR spectra are exchanged with reference and metabolite images that contain information to allow correct display, post-processing and analysis.

4. Standards & Systems

The systems involved are Acquisition Modalities, PACS, and Workstations (Display, Processing, Reporting).

The standards involved are the DICOM 2006: Enhanced MR Image, MR Spectroscopy, Enhanced CT Image, Enhanced XA/XRF, Enhanced PET objects and possibly the current US Supplement.

5. Discussion

These use cases may constitute the basis for one or more new Image Content profiles, which specifies, as applicable:

  • The required attributes (mostly already defined in the standard),
  • The relevant functional grouping
  • The content of the dimension module
  • The use of a Real World Values LUT
  • The use of a Supplemental Color LUT
  • The relevant attributes for display on a workstation

A key decision will be how many of the new objects to address this year.

The NEMA Committee for the Advancement of DICOM would like to organize a first informal testing of this profile with systems that envisage or already give support for enhanced CT and MR objects at the January 2008 connectathon.

Issues needing Addressing

Downgrading to Old Objects

How should a PACS handle it if the modality provided Enhanced but a client needed old style. Creation of the old objects is not so bad, and could be triggered based on the SOPs in the association for the C-STORE. The problem is that before the C-STORE there is probably a C-FIND and when you don't know what the client wants, how many series do you tell them there is. One Enhanced, but if they want Old, there are many situations you would want/need to split into multiple series. Similar when they query for image instances.

Realistically, I think that this would have to be done on the basis of the requesting AET, keeping a table in the SCP as to which AETs want "old" and which want "new" CT objects (or similarly for MR of course). This could either be configured manually (yuk!), or perhaps better done by "trying" to negotiate the enhanced objects in each outgoing C-STORE operation...that way any upgrade of the client could automatically be updated as soon as t gets upgraded (well ONE query later in fact!) Once the decision has been made, then splitting into series/images is probably not too difficult......if anyone would like to send me an example enhanced image would would benefit from splitting, then I'd happily give it a try - Dave Harvey

Upgrading to New Objects

Taking old objects and generating enhanced is even harder since there are required fields that would need to be filled and the necessary information is likely not present.

I agree with previous suggestions that this is unlikely to be helpful or useful, and could set a dangerous precedent for bad image construction by primary producers who should be filling the data out properly!