Literature DB >> 21301923

Five levels of PACS modularity: integrating 3D and other advanced visualization tools.

Kenneth C Wang1, Ross W Filice, James F Philbin, Eliot L Siegel, Paul G Nagy.   

Abstract

The current array of PACS products and 3D visualization tools presents a wide range of options for applying advanced visualization methods in clinical radiology. The emergence of server-based rendering techniques creates new opportunities for raising the level of clinical image review. However, best-of-breed implementations of core PACS technology, volumetric image navigation, and application-specific 3D packages will, in general, be supplied by different vendors. Integration issues should be carefully considered before deploying such systems. This work presents a classification scheme describing five tiers of PACS modularity and integration with advanced visualization tools, with the goals of characterizing current options for such integration, providing an approach for evaluating such systems, and discussing possible future architectures. These five levels of increasing PACS modularity begin with what was until recently the dominant model for integrating advanced visualization into the clinical radiologist's workflow, consisting of a dedicated stand-alone post-processing workstation in the reading room. Introduction of context-sharing, thin clients using server-based rendering, archive integration, and user-level application hosting at successive levels of the hierarchy lead to a modularized imaging architecture, which promotes user interface integration, resource efficiency, system performance, supportability, and flexibility. These technical factors and system metrics are discussed in the context of the proposed five-level classification scheme.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21301923      PMCID: PMC3222550          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-011-9366-1

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


  22 in total

1.  Requirements for an enterprise digital image archive.

Authors:  B J Erickson; K R Persons; N J Hangiandreou; E M James; C J Hanna; D G Gehring
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  Server-based approach to web visualization of integrated 3-D medical image data.

Authors:  A V Poliakov; E Albright; D Corina; G Ojemann; R F Martin; J F Brinkley
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  2001

3.  Multidetector CT angiography of pancreatic carcinoma: part I, evaluation of arterial involvement.

Authors:  Karen M Horton; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Dynamic 3D-CT angiography.

Authors:  M Matsumoto; N Kodama; Y Endo; J Sakuma; Ky Suzuki; T Sasaki; K Murakami; Ke Suzuki; T Katakura; F Shishido
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Evaluation of surface and volume rendering in 3D-CT of facial fractures.

Authors:  T Rodt; S O Bartling; J E Zajaczek; M A Vafa; T Kapapa; O Majdani; J K Krauss; M Zumkeller; H Matthies; H Becker; J Kaminsky
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 2.419

Review 6.  Advanced visualization of airways with 64-MDCT: 3D mapping and virtual bronchoscopy.

Authors:  Karen M Horton; Maureen R Horton; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Duplicated ectopic ureter with vaginal insertion: 3D CT urography with i.v. and percutaneous contrast administration.

Authors:  Simona Croitoru; Michael Gross; Elisha Barmeir
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Can 3D-CTA surpass DSA in diagnosis of cerebral aneurysm?

Authors:  Y Kato; K Katada; M Hayakawa; M Nakane; Y Ogura; K Sano; T Kanno
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  CT colonography: influence of 3D viewing and polyp candidate features on interpretation with computer-aided detection.

Authors:  Rong Shi; Pamela Schraedley-Desmond; Sandy Napel; Eric W Olcott; R Brooke Jeffrey; Judy Yee; Michael E Zalis; Daniel Margolis; David S Paik; Anthony J Sherbondy; Padmavathi Sundaram; Christopher F Beaulieu
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Open source software projects of the caBIG In Vivo Imaging Workspace Software special interest group.

Authors:  Fred W Prior; Bradley J Erickson; Lawrence Tarbox
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2007-09-11       Impact factor: 4.056

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Leveraging Internet technologies with DICOM WADO.

Authors:  Paul Lipton; Paul Nagy; Gorkem Sevinc
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 4.056

2.  [Image postprocessing part 2: algorithms and workflow].

Authors:  T Baumann; M Langer
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 0.635

3.  [Current reporting in radiology : what will happen tomorrow?].

Authors:  T Baumann; T Hackländer; E Kotter
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  A medical application integrating remote 3D visualization tools to access picture archiving and communication system on mobile devices.

Authors:  Longjun He; Xing Ming; Qian Liu
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2014-04-05       Impact factor: 4.460

Review 5.  Transforming Dermatologic Imaging for the Digital Era: Metadata and Standards.

Authors:  Liam J Caffery; David Clunie; Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski; Josep Malvehy; H Peter Soyer; Allan C Halpern
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 4.056

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.