Re: Image references from SR
Hi Leon
leon wrote:
[color=blue]
> In David Clunie's book "DICOM Structured Reporting" and also at this
> link:
> [url]http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/9e188c9d36f3b7eb/a87e6fa3924e7321?q=SR+IMAGE&rnum=3#a87e6fa3924e7321[/url]
>
> it is mentioned that basic text SR cannot Image references[/color]
I cannot find anywhere in my book where I say any such thing.
, but[color=blue]
> according to PS3.3 - 2004 A.35.1.3.1.1 & A.35.1.3.1.1 Basic text SR
> can contain IMAGE value types and TEXT value types can be inferred from
> IMAGE value types. I also looked back into previous DICOM standard
> versions (2000) but I didn't see any changes on this matter.
> Furthermore TID 2001 which is mentioned in the above link has inferred
> from IMAGE so I see no reason why the IOD can't be a legitimate Basic
> Text SR if it has an inferred from IMAGE relationship.[/color]
A TEXT content item INFERRED FROM an IMAGE content item is indeed
specifically allowed in the Basic Text SR.
I can't see anything in my book or the post you reference that says
otherwise. Gilles post mentioned CODE content items being inferred
from things, and CODE content items are not permitted in Basic Text SR
except as leaves.
[color=blue]
> Second question related also to image references is how should one
> retrieve from an archive an image referenced by a SR if the IMAGE value
> type uses the "Referenced SOP Sequence" (0008,1199) which contains only
> SOP class & SOP instance? Is it possible that writer's intention was
> that the report viewer should query the archive until it will find the
> requested SOP instance?
> Should I add always (although it an 1C tag) the tag "Current Requested
> Procedure Evidence Sequence" (0040,a375) in order to keep full track of
> the the referenced images? I haven't seen this sequence to be in use
> (except for Mammo CAD) by any vendor, so even if I add to this tag to
> my SR, I still can't retrive images that were referenced by other
> vendors SR. Any idea how should I proceed ?[/color]
I think you are saying that for a hierarchical C-MOVE, the Study Instance UID
and the Series Instance UID are needed in addition to the SOP Instance
UID. Only the latter is present in the Referenced SOP Sequence.
The Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is specifically intended
to factor out this additional information for the purpose that you
describe (amongst others).
Unfortunately, the Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is not
mandatory.
Rather, it is conditional on a rather hokey condition described as:
"Required if Composite Objects were acquired in order to satisfy the
Requested Procedure(s) for which the SR Document is generated and
Completion Flag (0040,A491) value is COMPLETE. May be present otherwise."
Further, Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is described as
follows (C.17.2.3):
"For a completed SR Document satisfying (i.e., being the final report for)
the current Requested Procedure(s), this sequence shall list the full set
of Composite SOP Instances created for the current Requested Procedure(s).
For other SOP Instances that include the SR Document General Module, this
sequence shall contain at minimum the set of Composite SOP Instances from
the current Requested Procedure(s) that are referenced in the content
tree."
This definition is a little inconsistent with the condition itself.
The confusion arises because we were trying to overload two concepts
in one attribute - what SOP instances the report applied to, and how
to retrieve them.
The unfortunate consequence of this is that if one has a Completion Flag
(0040,A491) value of PARTIAL, then one does not have to send this sequence,
or if one can somehow claim that there was no request in the first place,
then one does not have to send this sequence.
Currently, all SR IODs except Key Object Selection require the SR Document
General Module.
The Key Object Selection IOD requires that the same information be present,
it just describes the Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence in
the Key Object Document Module.
If you are indeed seeing SR instances from any vendor that do not contain
the appropriate information in Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence,
when they are Key Object Documents or when they are SR objects and
Completion Flag (0040,A491) value is COMPLETE, then they are probably
invalid SR objects. Please let me know if this is ever the case.
However, if they have a Completion Flag (0040,A491) value of PARTIAL, then
they are unfortunately probably legal.
I suspect that these type of PARTIAL objects will be those referred to
as "evidence" documents, such as come from the acquisition devices
making measurements. It will be extremely unfortunate if it becomes
common practice not to send the Current Requested Procedure Evidence
Sequence for evidence documents.
But I doubt that a CP at this stage to make the sequence just plain
mandatory would succeed, even though the description of the attribute
seems to conflict with the condition.
Best that I can suggest in such circumstances is to do as I think that
you are suggesting and perform a C-FIND at the Study and then Series
level for the current Study to try to find them, perhaps filtered by
Modality at the Series level to keep the number of matches tractable.
Of course the referenced instances might not be in the same Study as
the SR itself :(
Assuming relational queries are not available.
David
Re: Image references from SR
Hi David,
Thank you very much for your answer.
I am sorry for my mistake, I confused between two non-related issues.
Regarding the "Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence" tag, I
haven't encountered it in any SR (except Mammo-CAD) until now.
For example, the file report13.dcm in DicomScope database uses
reference to image but not the "Current Requested Procedure Evidence
Sequence" tag, which is OK since the tag is not mandatory.
But, since many vendors, including myself, use DicomScope for
validation, I doubt there are many vendors that use the "Current
Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence".
Thanks,
Leon
David Clunie wrote:[color=blue]
> Hi Leon
>
> leon wrote:
>[color=green]
> > In David Clunie's book "DICOM Structured Reporting" and also at this
> > link:
> > [url]http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.protocols.dicom/browse_thread/thread/9e188c9d36f3b7eb/a87e6fa3924e7321?q=SR+IMAGE&rnum=3#a87e6fa3924e7321[/url]
> >
> > it is mentioned that basic text SR cannot Image references[/color]
>
> I cannot find anywhere in my book where I say any such thing.
>
> , but[color=green]
> > according to PS3.3 - 2004 A.35.1.3.1.1 & A.35.1.3.1.1 Basic text SR
> > can contain IMAGE value types and TEXT value types can be inferred from
> > IMAGE value types. I also looked back into previous DICOM standard
> > versions (2000) but I didn't see any changes on this matter.
> > Furthermore TID 2001 which is mentioned in the above link has inferred
> > from IMAGE so I see no reason why the IOD can't be a legitimate Basic
> > Text SR if it has an inferred from IMAGE relationship.[/color]
>
> A TEXT content item INFERRED FROM an IMAGE content item is indeed
> specifically allowed in the Basic Text SR.
>
> I can't see anything in my book or the post you reference that says
> otherwise. Gilles post mentioned CODE content items being inferred
> from things, and CODE content items are not permitted in Basic Text SR
> except as leaves.
>[color=green]
> > Second question related also to image references is how should one
> > retrieve from an archive an image referenced by a SR if the IMAGE value
> > type uses the "Referenced SOP Sequence" (0008,1199) which contains only
> > SOP class & SOP instance? Is it possible that writer's intention was
> > that the report viewer should query the archive until it will find the
> > requested SOP instance?
> > Should I add always (although it an 1C tag) the tag "Current Requested
> > Procedure Evidence Sequence" (0040,a375) in order to keep full track of
> > the the referenced images? I haven't seen this sequence to be in use
> > (except for Mammo CAD) by any vendor, so even if I add to this tag to
> > my SR, I still can't retrive images that were referenced by other
> > vendors SR. Any idea how should I proceed ?[/color]
>
> I think you are saying that for a hierarchical C-MOVE, the Study Instance UID
> and the Series Instance UID are needed in addition to the SOP Instance
> UID. Only the latter is present in the Referenced SOP Sequence.
>
> The Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is specifically intended
> to factor out this additional information for the purpose that you
> describe (amongst others).
>
> Unfortunately, the Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is not
> mandatory.
>
> Rather, it is conditional on a rather hokey condition described as:
>
> "Required if Composite Objects were acquired in order to satisfy the
> Requested Procedure(s) for which the SR Document is generated and
> Completion Flag (0040,A491) value is COMPLETE. May be present otherwise."
>
> Further, Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence is described as
> follows (C.17.2.3):
>
> "For a completed SR Document satisfying (i.e., being the final report for)
> the current Requested Procedure(s), this sequence shall list the full set
> of Composite SOP Instances created for the current Requested Procedure(s).
> For other SOP Instances that include the SR Document General Module, this
> sequence shall contain at minimum the set of Composite SOP Instances from
> the current Requested Procedure(s) that are referenced in the content
> tree."
>
> This definition is a little inconsistent with the condition itself.
>
> The confusion arises because we were trying to overload two concepts
> in one attribute - what SOP instances the report applied to, and how
> to retrieve them.
>
> The unfortunate consequence of this is that if one has a Completion Flag
> (0040,A491) value of PARTIAL, then one does not have to send this sequence,
> or if one can somehow claim that there was no request in the first place,
> then one does not have to send this sequence.
>
> Currently, all SR IODs except Key Object Selection require the SR Document
> General Module.
>
> The Key Object Selection IOD requires that the same information be present,
> it just describes the Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence in
> the Key Object Document Module.
>
> If you are indeed seeing SR instances from any vendor that do not contain
> the appropriate information in Current Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence,
> when they are Key Object Documents or when they are SR objects and
> Completion Flag (0040,A491) value is COMPLETE, then they are probably
> invalid SR objects. Please let me know if this is ever the case.
>
> However, if they have a Completion Flag (0040,A491) value of PARTIAL, then
> they are unfortunately probably legal.
>
> I suspect that these type of PARTIAL objects will be those referred to
> as "evidence" documents, such as come from the acquisition devices
> making measurements. It will be extremely unfortunate if it becomes
> common practice not to send the Current Requested Procedure Evidence
> Sequence for evidence documents.
>
> But I doubt that a CP at this stage to make the sequence just plain
> mandatory would succeed, even though the description of the attribute
> seems to conflict with the condition.
>
> Best that I can suggest in such circumstances is to do as I think that
> you are suggesting and perform a C-FIND at the Study and then Series
> level for the current Study to try to find them, perhaps filtered by
> Modality at the Series level to keep the number of matches tractable.
>
> Of course the referenced instances might not be in the same Study as
> the SR itself :(
>
> Assuming relational queries are not available.
>
> David[/color]
Re: Image references from SR
leon <leons74@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> For example, the file report13.dcm in DicomScope database uses
> reference to image but not the "Current Requested Procedure Evidence
> Sequence" tag, which is OK since the tag is not mandatory.[/color]
The reason why this sequence is not contained in the report is quite
simple: at the time when we created the report the underlying DCMTK
did not yet support this sequence. This has changed in the meantime
and you should be able to create an enhanced version of the report
using the current DCMTK 3.5.3 as follows:
dcmsr/tests/mkreport 13
[color=blue]
> But, since many vendors, including myself, use DicomScope for
> validation, I doubt there are many vendors that use the "Current
> Requested Procedure Evidence Sequence".[/color]
In order to validate DICOM SR documents I would rather recommend
DCMcheck or any other DICOM validation tool. The tool dsrdump from
the DCMTK also has some useful options in order to check SR documents
for DICOM conformance.
Regards,
Joerg Riesmeier
OFFIS
Re: Image references from SR
> This has changed in the meantime and you should be able to create[color=blue]
> an enhanced version of the report using the current DCMTK 3.5.3 as
> follows:[/color]
I took this occasion to update the package with SR sample documents:
[url]ftp://dicom.offis.de/pub/dicom/offis/software/dscope/dscope360/support/srdoc103.zip[/url]
Regards,
Joerg Riesmeier
OFFIS
