Literature DB >> 11442127

Finding the optimal picture archiving and communication system (PACS) architecture: a comparison of three PACS designs.

W M Tellis1, K P Andriole.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: At present, there are two basic picture archiving and communication system (PACS) architectures: centralized with a central cache and controller, and distributed with a distributed cache and central controller. A third architecture proposed here is an autonomous one with a distributed cache and no controller. This report will investigate the performance (as measured be central processing unit [CPU] and network load, scalability, and examination retrieval and display latency) of these three types.
METHODS: The distributed PACS architecture will be simulated using an IMPAX R3.5 (AGFA, Ridgefield Park, NJ) PACS, while the centralized design will be simulated using an IMPAX R4 (AGFA) PACS. The autonomous system will be designed and implemented in-house. The autonomous system consists of two types of entities: basic components such as acquisition gateways, display stations, and long-term archives, and registry servers, which store global state information about the individual PACS components. The key feature of the autonomous system will be the replacement of the central PACS controller by the registry servers. In this scenario the registry servers monitor the interactions between the components, but do not directly govern them. Instead each component will contain the application logic it requires and will use the state information from the registry servers to take the appropriate action, such as routing images, prefetching studies, and expiring images from near line cache. In addition the routing of examinations will be optimized to reduce the duplication of image data. Display stations will be categorized by specialty (neuroradiology, pediatrics, chest, etc) and will retrieve studies for display on demand from intermediate servers dedicated to the corresponding specialty. Studies will be routed only to the intermediate servers and not to display stations.
RESULTS: By distributing the application logic, an autonomous PACS architecture can provide increased fault tolerance and therefore increased uptime. In addition, the lack of a central controller and the use of intermediate servers improve the scalability of the system, as well as reduce CPU and network loads.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11442127      PMCID: PMC3452671          DOI: 10.1007/BF03190301

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  5 in total

1.  The reality of picture archiving and communication systems (PACS): a survey.

Authors:  R A Bauman; G Gell
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  The philosophy of benchmark testing a standards-based picture archiving and communications system.

Authors:  N E Richardson; J A Thomas; D K Lyche; J Romlein; G S Norton; Q E Dolecek
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Benchmark testing the Digital Imaging Network-Picture Archiving and Communications System proposal of the Department of Defense.

Authors:  P D Shelton; D K Lyche; G S Norton; J Romlein; D P Lawrence; M A Cawthon; J A Thomas; N Richardson
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.056

4.  Subsystem throughputs of a clinical picture archiving and communications system.

Authors:  A W Wong; H K Huang
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Computers in imaging and health care: now and in the future.

Authors:  R L Arenson; K P Andriole; D E Avrin; R G Gould
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.056

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  [PACS: storage and retrieval of digital radiological image data].

Authors:  S Wirth; M Treitl; S Villain; A Lucke; S Nissen-Meyer; I Mittermaier; K-J Pfeifer; M Reiser
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  Hard disk online caches in picture archiving and communication systems archives: how big is beautiful?

Authors:  Stefan Wirth; Marcus Treitl; Ullrich-Gerd Mueller-Lisse; Johannes Rieger; Ingo Mittermaier; Klaus-Juergen Pfeifer; Maximilian Reiser
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 5.315

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.