Difference between revisions of "IHERO UseCase Curves and BACs"

Revision as of 11:31, 20 May 2010

This template is for one or two page IHE workitem proposals for initial review.

<Delete everything in italics and angle brackets and replace with real text>

1. Proposed Workitem: <initial working name for profile/whitepaper/etc>

Proposal Editor: <Name of author/editor/contact for the proposal>
Editor: <Name of candidate Lead Editor for the Profile, if known>
Date: N/A (Wiki keeps history)
Version: N/A (Wiki keeps history)
Domain: Radiation Oncology

2. The Problem

<Summarize the integration problem. What doesn’t work, or what needs to work.>

3. Key Use Case

<Describe a short use case scenario from the user perspective. The use case should demonstrate the integration/workflow problem.>

4. Standards & Systems

<List existing systems that are/could be involved in the problem/solution.>

<If known, list standards which might be relevant to the solution>

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?>

<This is the brief proposal. Try to keep it to 1 or at most 2 pages>

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 __NOTOC__
-==1. Proposed Workitem: ''Curves and Beam Aperture Contours for DRR's, kV, fluoro''==
+''This template is for one or two page IHE workitem proposals for initial review.''
-* Proposal Editor: ''David Waid, Martha Jefferson Hospital, david.waid@mjh.org''
-* Editor: ''David Waid, Colin Field''
+''<Delete everything in italics and angle brackets and replace with real text>
+==1. Proposed Workitem: ''<initial working name for profile/whitepaper/etc>''==
+* Proposal Editor: ''<Name of author/editor/contact for the proposal>''
+* Editor: ''<Name of candidate Lead Editor for the Profile, if known>''
 * Date:    N/A (Wiki keeps history)
 * Version: N/A (Wiki keeps history)
@@ Line 13: / Line 19: @@
 ==2. The Problem==
-Varian OBI linacs have the ability to use curves and beam aperture contours for kV and fluoro imaging.  Curves and beam aperture contours can be very useful for setting up patients, especially when trying to verify respiratory gated patients. There are some severe, and frankly, unacceptable limitations to what Pinnacle and Impac can do with curves and beam aperture contours (BAC's).
+''<Summarize the integration problem. What doesn’t work, or what needs to work.>''
 ==3. Key Use Case==
-'''Pinnacle limitations:''' To my knowledge, Pinnacle can not be used to directly create curves or beam aperture contours.  It is often preferable to generate curves or BAC's using the planning system rather than manually drawing them on a DRR in the R & V system. There are several painful workarounds such as i.)leaving the desired curve or BAC burned into the DRR from Pinnacle and then tracing it by hand in Impac using the mouse or ii.) having to purchase a standalone Eclipse system with RTChart in order to more properly create computer-generated curves or BAC's.
+''<Describe a short use case scenario from the user perspective.  The use case should demonstrate the integration/workflow problem.>''
-'''Impac limitations:''' When drawing directly on the DRR, Impac limits each DRR to 16 curves and 1 beam aperture contour.  Only the beam aperture contours will show up on a Varian OBI machine during fluoroscopy.  Additionally, the drawing tools are primitive and do not allow for satisfactory editing.
-<br>
+''<Feel free to add a second use case scenario demonstrating how it “should” work.  Try to indicate the people/systems, the tasks they are doing, the information they need, and hopefully where the information should come from.>''
-This issue along with a workaround was presented as a poster at the 2008 3rd Annual SRS/SBRT conference put on by the Cleveland Clinic.
 ==4. Standards & Systems==