Report from DICOM Stds Cttee meeting 4/18

[Solomon, Harry (GE Healthcare)]

Hello, everyone –

 

This past week I presented the new work item proposal to define a standard encapsulation of cytometry files in DICOM. Quite unexpectedly this became the hottest discussion item on the agenda of the DICOM Standards Committee, and action was tabled until the next meeting in June.

 

The issue became one of policy – when is it appropriate to encapsulate non-DICOM formats in DICOM?  This is perhaps not an unusual question – after standardizing two encapsulations (for PDF and CDA), the third becomes a trend, and people start wondering about the fourth and fifth.  That perceived trend elicited the desire for additional consideration of where the concept of DICOM encapsulation is going, and whether changes in the broader environment may impact the approach.  So the committee asked for a white paper to elaborate the issues and recommend a policy before proceeding with this work item.  Since the next meeting is in June, that is only a two month delay, and tabling action until then was considered prudent.

 

In the meantime, some committee members recommended alternative approaches to encapsulation.  One suggestion was that since most institutions (at least in the U.S. in response to  Meaningful Use incentives) will be implementing EHR systems with a capability to store CDA documents for patient care coordination purposes, cytometry files might be encapsulated in CDA and stored in the EHR repository.  I happen to think there are significant deployment and operational issues with that approach, given that deployment of such repositories is still immature. 

 

However, an alternative DICOM approach was also proposed.  Since the number of device manufacturers for the cytometry community is relatively small, and there will need to be profiling of the lab workflow, cytometry files could be encapsulated in the existing standard DICOM Raw Data information object, or even in a private DICOM object class, with the necessary attributes for interoperability defined in an IHE profile.  There was general consensus that that would be an appropriate interim working solution, and could be easily transitioned to a cytometry specific encapsulation format should that be approved.

 

So in summary, we can proceed with the architecture of encapsulating cytometry files in DICOM, but the encapsulation specification would be defined in an IHE profile for use of the DICOM Raw Data information object. 

 

Harry Solomon

Interoperability Architect, GE Healthcare

Co-chair, HL7 Imaging Integration WG / DICOM WG-20

 

M +1 847 732 0154

harry....@ge.com

 

540 W Northwest Hwy

Barrington, IL 60010

 

GE imagination at work

[Ruud Hulspas]

Thanks for the update Harry.
You mentioned:

"Since the number of device manufacturers for the cytometry community is relatively small, and there will need to be profiling of the lab workflow, cytometry files could be encapsulated in the existing standard DICOM Raw Data information object, or even in a private DICOM object class, with the necessary attributes for interoperability defined in an IHE profile."

Can you explain why the fact that this concerns a small community and only a few manufacturers allows for this ? Is there anything we need to expect from the community and manufacturers to 'get on board' with ?

Ruud

Care2 makes it easy for everyone to live a healthy, green lifestyle and impact the causes you care about most. Over 12 Million members! http://www.care2.com

Feed a child by searching the web! Learn how http://www.care2.com/toolbar