IHE Mammo - Brief proposal for extensions to Mammo Display Profile for DBT, US, MRI, etc.

Skip to first unread message

David Clunie

Jul 26, 2013, 9:55:24 AM7/26/13
to ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Ellen Mendelson, Lashawn Edwards
Hi folks

The IHE Rad TC is working on its timelines for the next development
cycle, currently in draft at:


Note that these call for brief proposals by Aug 30.

So, if we are going to do, for example, a DBT extension to Mammo Display,
we need to decide soon, and draft it.

I assume that after the SIIM DBT forum we want to sustain the momentum
generated and address matters in the upcoming cycle. Let me know if
anyone disagrees.

Another question that has arisen is whether we also want to address
multi-modality display requirements, e.g., to define behavior for
displaying ultrasound, especially elastography and whole breast (which
is why I have cc'd Ellen), as well as MRI.

If we are going to do work in the next cycle, then feel free to
comment on any of the proposed timeline milestones.


PS. The membership of this list has probably not been updated in a while,
so if you want to be added/removed/replaced or whatever, contact
Lashawn Edwards <ledw...@rsna.org>.

Schroeder, Antje

Aug 9, 2013, 12:25:56 AM8/9/13
to dcl...@dclunie.com, ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Ellen Mendelson, Lashawn Edwards
Hi David,
Working on a Breast Tomosynthesis profile or even a multi-modality Breast Imaging Profile sounds very interesting to us and Siemens would support a work item on this topic.
We definitely think that profiling the creation and display of DBT objects would increase use and interoperability of these objects. We see more risk on the ultrasound side, especially with regards to 3D Ultrasound of the breast, since adaption of the enhanced US object in general is very slow and the use and feasibility of this object for 3D Breast Ultrasound has not been evaluated yet .
If we should decide on a multi-modality Breast Imaging Profile we need to design it in a way, that slow adoption on one Modality side (or even lack thereof), e.g. Ultrasound, does not prevent adoption of the other Modality (DBT).
Best regards
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "IHE Mammography" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ihe-mammograp...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ihe-mammography.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

David Clunie

Aug 25, 2013, 9:41:27 AM8/25/13
to ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Margarita Zuley, Ellen Mendelson
Hi all

Time is running short to submit a brief proposal, so if the group
is going to do this, a vendor representative probably needs to
volunteer to be the editor ... I don't think I am going to have
the time to do this myself as I did last time.

We should probably focus on DBT, and probably without CAD for
now, and leave the multi-modality aspects for another day.


David Clunie

Aug 30, 2013, 2:45:29 PM8/30/13
to Schroeder, Antje, ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Ellen Mendelson, Lashawn Edwards, Donna Plecha, Beverly Rosipko, Magnus Ranlöf, Julian Marshall, Hans Kersbergen, Baidya Saurav, Brad Levin
Hi all

I have created the brief proposal for this item:


I have, as discussed, not included the multi-modality aspects.

By the way, if you are not a member of the email group at
"ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com" and want to be (or are
and do not want to be), let La Shawn know.


On 8/9/13 12:25 AM, Schroeder, Antje wrote:

David Clunie

Aug 30, 2013, 3:50:36 PM8/30/13
to Marshall, Julian, Schroeder, Antje, ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Ellen Mendelson, Lashawn Edwards, Donna Plecha, Beverly Rosipko, Magnus Ranlöf, Hans Kersbergen, Baidya Saurav, Brad Levin
Good point; I will try and remember to make that split when
we get to the detailed proposal phase, which is the next step.


On 8/30/13 3:43 PM, Marshall, Julian wrote:
> I would suggest that there be two critical use cases ... the first one where the prior is 2D and the current is tomo (or combo -- 2D+3D), and the second one, where both current and prior are tomo (or combo).
> Julian

David Clunie

Sep 19, 2013, 5:44:42 AM9/19/13
to Marshall, Julian, Hitzelberger, Ron, Schroeder, Antje, ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com, Ellen Mendelson, Lashawn Edwards, Donna Plecha, Beverly Rosipko, Magnus Ranlöf, Hans Kersbergen, Baidya Saurav, Brad Levin, Pat Montgomery
Hi all

A detailed proposal is required by Sep 20 (tomorrow), so I have
produced one that elaborated on our initial brief proposal. See:


I have incorporated Julian's earlier comment.

If anyone has any other suggested changes, let me know by tomorrow if
you can.

Also, for calendar planning purposes, if this proposal is accepted,
then the first meeting of the Rad TC in Oak Brook, IL to develop the
proposal will be 2013-11-12 to 14 ... it might be advisable to plan
for a separate mammo group meeting (either F2F or virtual) prior to
that, to get our ducks in a row before working on this with the
full Rad TC ... let me know your preferences.

Thanks ... David

PS. Don't forget to contact La Shawn Edwards <ledw...@rsna.org> to
get added to <ihe-mam...@googlegroups.com> if you want to
participate or observe and are not already a member.
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages