DBT FT Evaluation

Proposal

The Digital Breast Tomosynthesis profile has been nominated for advancement to Final Text. (Advocate: Antje Schroeder) Per the Final Text Process, Items in blue text below warrant Committee discussion.

Technical Committee Checklist

• Are all significant CPs against the profile "closed"?

There are no open DBT CPs

• Are all significant CPs against the underlying standards "closed"?

There are no DBT related CPs in DICOM

• Have all significant comments been CP'd or rejected?

Yes

• Have all open issues listed in the Supplement been closed?

The first open issue can be closed, the supplement is aligned with DICOM CP 1342

Open issue 2 (Should Evidence Creators particiapte in the For Processing Breast Projection X-Ray Images Option) is still open, but I would recommend to close with any further action, since no feedback was received regarding this topic

The option is not part of the text. Antje will add some comments regarding why this open issue can be closed.

• Have all significant issues at Connectathon been dealt with?

After checking with Lynn Felhofer and David Clunie, no issues have been raised at the Connectathon.

• Gather feedback from implementers via a formal questionnaire to Connectathon participants

See above

• Has the Connectathon Project Manager been queried and significant issues addressed?

See above

Planning Committee Checklist

• Has the profile been through a Connectathon in at least two regions?

Yes (NA 2015 and 2016, and EU 2015 and 2016)

• Has the profile been successfully tested with all actors at least at one Connectathon?

All major actors (Acquisition Modalities, Image Displays, Evidence Creators and Image Manager/Archives) have been tested. However Print Composers and Servers have not been tested

Acquisition Modalities: GE, Fuji, Siemens

Image Manager Archives: Agfa, GE, Dell, McKesson, Karos, Laitek, Visus, ...

Image Displays: Tiani, Sectra, McKesson, Siemens, ...

Evidence Creator: TBD

• Have different implementations of each actor in the profile been tested?

Yes (see above)

• Have all the options been tested successfully at at least one Connectathon?

Needs to be clarified with Lynn

• Are there IHE-provided software testing tools to address all aspects of the profile?

Needs to be clarified with Lynn

• Have the standards underlying the profile been implemented? In similar use cases? In healthcare? In general IT?

[Antje] The Breast Tomosynthesis Image Storage SOP Class has been supported by major vendors in this area.

• (Do you have concrete reason to believe that this works robustly in the Real World) / (Are any products available for purchase that implement the profile?)

[Antje] This profile is building upon the highly successful Mammography Image Profile and extends it to support Breast Tomosynthesis, which is gaining more and importance. Therefore it is assumed that the demand and support for this profile will increase.

• Have all issues that may have been raised about the profile been resolved?

No issues have been raised

• Has there been sufficient interest in the profile to generate a one-page overview of the profile

Yes, see DBT overview