Study/Serie/Object with Structured Report - DICOM

This is a discussion on Study/Serie/Object with Structured Report - DICOM ; I'm dealing with this situation: I have a study, with two or more series (different modalities). How many structured reports the reporting station should create? only one with references to both series of images or two reports for each series ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Study/Serie/Object with Structured Report

  1. Study/Serie/Object with Structured Report

    I'm dealing with this situation:

    I have a study, with two or more series (different modalities).

    How many structured reports the reporting station should create? only
    one with references to both series of images or two reports for each
    series of images. Should a final report be included with the final
    conclusion?

    How should I link the series with reports. I know they both must have
    the same study information, but what about the case in which I have
    more than one report and more that one serie.

    Regards,

    erik


  2. Re: Study/Serie/Object with Structured Report


    erik_campos@entelchile.net wrote:
    > I'm dealing with this situation:
    >
    > I have a study, with two or more series (different modalities).
    >
    > How many structured reports the reporting station should create? only
    > one with references to both series of images or two reports for each
    > series of images. Should a final report be included with the final
    > conclusion?
    >
    > How should I link the series with reports. I know they both must have
    > the same study information, but what about the case in which I have
    > more than one report and more that one serie.
    >

    There seems to be an implicit assumption in your question that series
    of different modalities in the same study must be different requested
    procedures requiring different reports. While these different series
    may well reflect multiple different requested procedures, it is the
    requested procedures, not the series themselves which would drive what
    reports need to be generated. That said, just as a DICOM study can
    contain series from different modalities, so too can a single report
    cover multiple different requested procedures AND the series which make
    up the evidence documents for those requested procedures. Recognize too
    that you can have cases where there is only a single series for which
    multiple requested procedures apply to different subsets of images in
    the series. Or, you can have multiple series and corresponding subsets
    of images from the each of the series apply to different requested
    procedures.

    The "classic" group procedure case fits this model. Consider a CT study
    from the shoulders to the pelvis consisting of a "without contrast" and
    a "with contrast" series. Three requested procedures need to be
    reported for the chest, abdomen, and pelvis regions. For each of the
    regions, images from both the "with" and "without" series need to be
    reported. You can come up with other scenarios which more closely
    resemble your question --i.e. your example could be for CT&PET or CT&MR
    series of the same anatomic region all contained in a single study. In
    any case, the principle is the same. It is the requested procedures
    which drive the reporting requirements not the organizational structure
    of the images as generated by the acquisition procedure(s).

    Whether you generate a single report for all the requested procedures
    (and series) covered in a study; or generate multiple reports, one for
    each requested procedure, the SR is supposed to contain references to
    a) the performed procedures which generated the images, b) the
    requested procedures which caused the acquisitions procedures to be
    performed and c) the evidence documents (ie the images and subsequent
    analytic objects) evaluated in the performance of the report.

    The system receiving the report is likely going to be the one which
    will determine whether or not you need to generate multiple reports or
    a single report. If there is an automated system receiving the
    report(s) it is my guess that the receiving system is going to want a
    report for each procedure. However, if the receiving system is able to
    pull a list of requested procedures out of the single report, you could
    do only one; but for the most part, its a one-to-one world out there.

    Back to your original question - a single study with multiple series
    from different modalities - which set of images do you reference when
    you are generating multiple reports. Although with a modality worklist,
    it is not THAT difficult to make one of those studies come into being,
    one does have to go through some hoops to make it happen. It is not
    something the modalities would tend to do all on their own. The fact
    that the series from different modalities are being combined into a
    single study implies someone either wanted them reported together; or,
    if they did in fact, want them reported separately, they want both
    series to be visible to the interpreting physician as a reference when
    reporting each one separately.

    In this latter case, even though the "other" series does not contain
    the images of the current procedure being reported, the images from
    that other series are contributing to the conclusions the interpreting
    physician is drawing. So, it is my opinion you should reference the
    full set of images in the study for both reports even when you are
    generating separate reports.

    So if you for example had a CT&MR study of the head, there should be a
    CT requested procedure and an MR requested procedure. Each SR generated
    would reference the full set of images but the CT report would
    reference only the CT requested procedure and the MR report would
    reference only the MR requested procedure.

    I didn't understand your question about the referencing the final
    reports in the final conclusion.


+ Reply to Thread