X-Git-Url: https://git.creatis.insa-lyon.fr/pubgit/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=Doc%2FHowToCorrelatePETCT.txt;h=126de1e597aee9afa6054e3f2b7427a57d416369;hb=2299a5f222b24d22ed55327d9f842991a8da3794;hp=08976fe26166c417821096373112e7faf2870056;hpb=ba1f62230b9403c9d2cdc56e4d0adbc74a5c5b6a;p=gdcm.git diff --git a/Doc/HowToCorrelatePETCT.txt b/Doc/HowToCorrelatePETCT.txt index 08976fe2..126de1e5 100644 --- a/Doc/HowToCorrelatePETCT.txt +++ b/Doc/HowToCorrelatePETCT.txt @@ -1,11 +1,33 @@ -[Spatial Registration] -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/ab94a61d33082e29/d929474e92c30b24?q=PET+CT&rnum=28#d929474e92c30b24 - +*************************** +- CT/PET Links: [Correlating CT and PT series] -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/50bd859e0232a735/6040b545240c8fa4?q=PET+CT&rnum=18#6040b545240c8fa4 +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/50bd859e0232a735/6040b545240c8fa4 +Quote: +For completeness, there are three ways an application can +correlate CT and PET (or other sets) using DICOM only: + +1) Code all the images with the same Frame of Reference UID. +At least one major vendor does this now. + +2) Make assumptions based on specific implementation behavior +based on data elements that match (e.g. perhaps Study Time, or +matching values in the General Equipment Module). +Without actual trial and experience verifying the correlation, +I agree, that an assumption is not wise + +3) Use the recent Supplement 73 Spatial Registration Storage SOP Classes. +This capability allows explicitly specifying the spatial transformation +from one Frame of Reference to another. However, this supplement +is probably too recent to be in use. + +[Is there a SOP class for CT-PET images?] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/bb96abb730624a8a/5a78f1ff0199a727 -fMRI Dicom objects -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/30897c138442daad/27382b21968ce0b3?q=PET+CT&rnum=16#27382b21968ce0b3 +[Everything you have always hated about the DICOM PET SOP Class, but were afraid to ask] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/dc3a07d4999445ae/560fd0a064145d61 + +[fMRI Dicom objects] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/30897c138442daad/27382b21968ce0b3 Quote: WG 17 is considering the matter of registration of images in 3D, including rigid (and probably non-rigid) body @@ -15,17 +37,55 @@ as a consequence of the prevalence of PET-CT fusion applications. See: ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/supps/sup73_05.pdf --> ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/final/sup73_ft4.pdf +broken link use instead: ftp://medical.nema.org/medical/dicom/final/sup73_ft4.pdf +[4 PET/CT questions] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/56d07d5686e2ec67/b4c131f3e711716f -[Everything you have always hated about the DICOM PET SOP Class, but were afraid to ask] -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/dc3a07d4999445ae/560fd0a064145d61?q=PET+CT&rnum=13#560fd0a064145d61 -presentation context ID -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/a4bb2647d5a91001/d0fbff58a644ce7c?q=PET+CT&rnum=12#d0fbff58a644ce7c +*************************** +- Spatial registration oriented: +[Spatial Registration] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/ab94a61d33082e29/d929474e92c30b24 + +[presentation context ID] +http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/a4bb2647d5a91001/d0fbff58a644ce7c + +*************************** +Adding comment by Doug Sluis (dsluis at clinical-knowledge.com) +To your numbered questions: +1. Yes they are separate SOP Instances. (What is alternative?) +2. Yes. (although the recent Spatial Registration SOP Class is a possible option) + +There is no guarantee that CT and PET slices are one-to-one or +that the slices are spatially coincident. Attempts to spatially sort +may not succeed. -4 PET/CT questions -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/56d07d5686e2ec67/b4c131f3e711716f?q=PET+CT+dicom&rnum=1#b4c131f3e711716f +> I am trying to gather some information about CT-PET acquisition and how +> to order/link slices together properly(*). +> +> 1. I understand there is not and there won't be any SOP Class for +> CT-PET. But should we still consider this as two *independent* SOP +> Class Instances ? +> +> 2. Image acquired in this dual modality *have* to have the same Frame +> of Reference UID, right ? +> +> In this case I'll add the following strategy in gdcm to organize the +> slices: +> +> 1. Open a DICOM file A +> 2. Open another DICOM file B +> 3. Same Serie/Study ? +> * No -> return +> * Yes -> continue +> 4. Same Frame of Reference ? +> * No -> Return +> * Yes -> continue +> 5 A is CT and B is PT ? +> * No -> return +> * Yes -> continue +> 6 Same Image Position ? +> * No -> Return +> * Yes: We found a match ! -Is there a SOP class for CT-PET images? -http://groups.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/bb96abb730624a8a/5a78f1ff0199a727?q=PET+CT+&rnum=11#5a78f1ff0199a727