19 March 2014 Separation of metadata and bulkdata to speed DICOM tag morphing
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Most medical images are archived and transmitted using the DICOM format. The DICOM information model combines image pixel data and associated metadata into a single object. It is not possible to access the metadata separately from the pixel data. However, there are important use cases that only need access to metadata, and the DICOM format increases the running time of those use cases. Tag morphing is an example of one such use case. Tag or attribute morphing includes insertion, deletion, or modification of one or more of the metadata attributes in a study. It is typically used for order reconciliation on study acquisition or to localize the Issuer of Patient ID and the Patient ID attributes when data from one Medical Record Number (MRN) domain is transferred to or displayed in a different domain. This work uses the Multi-Series DICOM (MSD) format to reduce the time required for tag morphing. The MSD format separates metadata from pixel data, and at the same time eliminates duplicate attributes. MSD stores studies using two files rather than in many single frame files typical of DICOM. The first file contains the de-duplicated study metadata, and the second contains pixel data and other bulkdata. A set of experiments were performed where metadata updates were applied to a set of DICOM studies stored in both the traditional Single Frame DICOM (SFD) format and the MSD format. The time required to perform the updates was recorded for each format. The results show that tag morphing is, on average, more than eight times faster in MSD format.
© (2014) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Mahmoud Ismail, Yu Ning, James Philbin, "Separation of metadata and bulkdata to speed DICOM tag morphing", Proc. SPIE 9039, Medical Imaging 2014: PACS and Imaging Informatics: Next Generation and Innovations, 903905 (19 March 2014); doi: 10.1117/12.2043933; https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2043933
PROCEEDINGS
6 PAGES


SHARE
RELATED CONTENT

Review Of Experience With PACS Cost Analysis Model
Proceedings of SPIE (May 25 1989)
Database requirements for PACS
Proceedings of SPIE (August 01 1990)
PACS for radiology
Proceedings of SPIE (February 09 1996)
On-line medical record/RIS/PACS interface
Proceedings of SPIE (May 15 1994)
Investment alternative: the status quo or PACS?
Proceedings of SPIE (August 01 1990)

Back to Top