Difference between revisions of "PaLM Conf Minutes 2023-December-06"
(Created page with "IHE Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (PaLM) Conference call December 6, 2023 Hunter Putzke Mary Kennedy Raj Dash Hynek Kruzik Filip Migom ==Attendees== {| class="wikita...") |
|||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
**Examples for SPM-6 will be ready for January meeting. | **Examples for SPM-6 will be ready for January meeting. | ||
**Questions from Jan | **Questions from Jan | ||
− | [[File:IHE PaLM Image 1 12-6-2023.png|600px]] | + | **[[File:IHE PaLM Image 1 12-6-2023.png|600px]] |
***LAB-80 message | ***LAB-80 message | ||
****Unsolicited or as response to LAB-81 | ****Unsolicited or as response to LAB-81 |
Revision as of 15:25, 8 January 2024
IHE Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (PaLM)
Conference call December 6, 2023
Hunter Putzke Mary Kennedy Raj Dash Hynek Kruzik Filip Migom
Attendees
Ralf Herzog | Francesca Frexia |
Kevin Schap | Riki Merrick |
Megumi Kondo | Ruben Fernandes |
Sam Spencer | Gunter Haroske |
Alessandro Sulis | Kazunari Fukagawa |
David Clunie | Jan Schutrups |
Dan Rutz | Norman Zerbe |
Hunter Putzke | Mary Kennedy |
Raj Dash | Hynek Kruzik |
Filip Migom |
Next PaLM Meeting: January 10, 2024
Agenda Items
- Re-vote on CP-LAB-267
- CP267 – Motion to approve updated - against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: unanimously – will check for quorum, if not achieved, then will proceed.
- Will send to Mary Yungers – Jan 2024 so we can review the final version after that call – Riki will let Mary Yungers know about the plan.
- CP267 – Motion to approve updated - against: 0, abstain: 0, in favor: unanimously – will check for quorum, if not achieved, then will proceed.
- ECDP meeting joint with DICOM WG26
- DICOM WG26 has been working on a Connectathon prior to the conference.
- DICOM WG 26 has not discussed meeting jointly with PaLM.
- If we are close to finishing DPIO and DPIA updates after Porto we may want to meet with WG26 at ECDP.
- World like to start on the evidence creation.
- The DICOM WG26 Connectathon is annotation focused.
- Vendors should be at ECDP
- Pre-conference will be available on June 4 and 5th – no problem for rooms for that time per Norman. Just let him know.
- Digital Pathology
- Examples for SPM-6 will be ready for January meeting.
- Questions from Jan
-
- LAB-80 message
- Unsolicited or as response to LAB-81
- LAB-82 as output
- LAB-80 questions:
- Where would the studyID go?
- Should be created by the manager and the scanner should use them
- Accession ID – is this really O?
- No, it is M.
- Datatype includes the assigning authority = DICOM issuer
- Reference Request Sequence = code for the procedure codified in OBR-4
- In DICOM we allow breaking down of the steps.
- In V2 we would be using OBX segments after OBR to describe specific parameters for the scanner.
- We could come up with a list of universal protocols.
- For implementations we map the scanner equipment procedure codes to the LIS procedure codes to understand the process steps.
- Variation on specimen processing is communicated in OBX segments after SPM.
- DICOM design supports making images being able to be detached from the AP list access
- Include all the details around the processing
- Can create resolutions by using pixels or with the lenses in the scanner – how to deal with that?
- In DICOM, these are pixel spacing attribute for any particular layer, defining the resolution (if it was down-sampled or up-sampled – has also field called objective lens power – so can be recorded in DICOM).
- DICOM followed the HL7 Specimen DAM
- Fixation, staining,
- What the specimen actually is
- DICOM encourages use of codes for body site = SPM-8
- Where would the studyID go?
- LAB-82
- Derived / primary / resampled – where does that go?
- DICOM object
- Vendors differ in how they encode those in different patterns.
- It should be discussed with WG 26, not a PlaM issue (unless we need to represent this in DPIA.)
- How do you know you are not missing image layers?
- If it is not there, it does not exist.
- Scan power
- Objective lens power is supposed to represent the lens power with which the image was made.
- Derived / primary / resampled – where does that go?
- LAB-80 message
- Goal is to have all the information in the messaging so we can fully automate the
- Do we need to consider using an equipment command message?
- Proficiency testing profile updates and review of mappings - to be discussed at January 10, 2024 call
From Chat
08:24:01 From Raj Dash to Everyone: So Scanner does NOT create
08:25:05 From Gunter Haroske to Everyone: The Specimen Identifier in LAB-80 is not the BlockID but the Slide(better Section)ID?
08:26:22 From Rúben Fernandes to Everyone: Replying to "Checking my notes..." DPIA does not define that I believe. But for the sake of generating required elements, the scanner may generate if not available.
08:31:17 From Gunter Haroske to Everyone: Replying to "Checking my notes..." It should be available by the LIS which produced it.
08:36:35 From Raj Dash to Everyone: We probably need to align DPIA to accommodate pixel resolution (dpi) along with optical magnification.
08:37:21 From Raj Dash to Everyone: It is important for comparing images should populate the image file
08:37:37 From Gunter Haroske to Everyone: This would be more useful than magnification alone
08:37:56 From Raj Dash to Everyone: But that is up to the scanner... so not sure we need to accommodate in DPIA UNLESS this is configurable and needs to be part of the order
08:38:23 From Raj Dash to Everyone: I don't think I can adjust DPI
08:38:30 From Raj Dash to Everyone: Only optical magnification
08:38:41 From Raj Dash to Everyone: The DPI resolution is fixed for every scanner, I think...
08:38:54 From Raj Dash to Everyone: Because imaging sensor fixed
08:40:25 From Raj Dash to Everyone: I will make sure to accommodate those Jan in the examples
08:42:11 From Raj Dash to Everyone: If we specify, then LIS will start using. I don't think there is a technical limitation
08:43:05 From Dan Rutz to Everyone: Agreed there shouldn't be a technical limitation there.
08:47:49 From Raj Dash to Everyone: Why not store the ratio ? What is the downside?
08:50:46 From Rúben Fernandes to Everyone: It can be inferred, so having it there wouldn't add a lot to a viewer
09:00:54 From Kevin Schap to Everyone: Reach out to me for issues you would like to have added to DICOM WG-26 agenda