Search the FAQ Archives

3 - A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M
N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z
faqs.org - Internet FAQ Archives

Medical Image Format FAQ, Part 2/8

( Part1 - Part2 - Part3 - Part4 - Part5 - Part6 - Part7 - Part8 )
[ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index | Property taxes ]
Archive-name: medical-image-faq/part2
Posting-Frequency: monthly
Last-modified: Sun Dec 21 09:16:29 EST 2003
Version: 4.26

See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge
    2.2 ACR/NEMA DICOM 3.0


	ACR/NEMA Standards Publications

	    PS 3.1 <- DICOM 3 - Introduction & Overview PS 3.8 <- DICOM 3 -
	    Network Communication Support

	    PS 3.2 <- DICOM 3 - Conformance PS 3.3 <- DICOM 3 - Information
	    Object Definitions PS 3.4 <- DICOM 3 - Service Class Specifications
	    PS 3.5 <- DICOM 3 - Data Structures & Encoding PS 3.6 <- DICOM 3 -
	    Data Dictionary PS 3.7 <- DICOM 3 - Message Exchange PS 3.9 <- DICOM
	    3 - Point-to-Point Communication

	    PS 3.10 <- DICOM 3 - Media Storage & File Format PS 3.11 <- DICOM 3
	    - Media Storage Application Profiles PS 3.12 <- DICOM 3 - Media
	    Formats & Physical Media

	    PS 3.13 <- DICOM 3 - Print Management Point-to-Point Communication
	    Support PS 3.14 <- DICOM 3 - Grayscale Standard Display Function PS
	    3.15 <- DICOM 3 - Security Profiles PS 3.16 <- DICOM 3 - Content
	    Mapping Resource (DCMR)


	DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) standards are of
	course the hot topic at every radiological trade show.  Unlike previous
	attempts at developing a standard, this one seems to have the potential
	to actually achieve its objective, which in a nutshell, is to allow
	vendors to produce a piece of equipment or software that has a high
	probability of communicating with devices from other vendors.


	Where DICOM differs substantially from other attempts, is in defining so
	called Service-Object Pairs.  For instance if a vendor's MR DICOM
	conformance statement says that it supports an MR Storage Class as a
	Service Class Provider, and another vendor's workstation says that it
	supports an MR Storage Class as a Service Class User, and both can
	connect via TCP/IP over Ethernet, then the two devices will almost
	certainly be able to talk to each other once they are setup with each
	others network addresses and so on.


	The keys to the success of DICOM are the use of standard network
	facilities for interconnection (TCP/IP and ISO-OSI), a mechanism of
	association establishment that allows for negotiation of how messages
	are to be transferred, and an object-oriented specification of
	Information Objects (ie.  data sets) and Service Classes.


	Of course all this makes for a huge and difficult to read standard, but
	once the basic concepts are grasped, the standard itself just provides a
	detailed reference.  From the users' and equipment purchasers' points of
	view the important thing is to be able to read and match up the
	Conformance Statements from each vendor to see if two pieces of
	equipment will talk.


	Just being able to communicate and transfer information is of course not
	sufficient - these are only tools to help construct a total system with
	useful functionality.  Because a workstation can pull an image off an
	MRI scanner doesn't mean it knows when to do it, when the image has
	become available, to which patient it belongs, and where it is
	subsequently archived, not to mention notifying the Radiology or
	Hospital Information System (RIS/HIS) when such a task has been
	performed.  In other words DICOM Conformance does not guarantee
	functionality, it only facilitates connectivity.


	In otherwords, don't get too carried away with espousing the virtues of
	DICOM, demanding it from vendors, and expecting it to be the panacea to
	create a useful multi-vendor environment.


	To get more information about DICOM:


	   - Purchase the standards from NEMA.

	   - Ftp the final versions of the drafts in electronic form
	      one of the sites described below.

	   - Follow the Usenet group comp.protocols.dicom.

	   - Get a copy of "Understanding DICOM 3.0" $12.50 from Kodak.

	   - Insist that your existing and potential vendors supply you
	      with DICOM conformance statements before you upgrade or purchase,
	      and don't buy until you know what they mean.  Don't take no for an
	      answer!!!!


	What is all this doing in an FAQ about medical image formats you ask ?
	Well first of all, in many ways DICOM 3.0 will solve future connectivity
	problems, if not provide functional solutions to common problems.  Hence
	actually getting the images from point A to B is going to be easier if
	everyone conforms.  Furthermore, for those of us with old equipment,
	interfacing it to new DICOM conforming equipment is going to be a
	problem.  In otherwords old network solutions and file formats are going
	to have to be transformed if they are going to communicate
	unidirectionally or bidirectionally with DICOM 3.0 nodes.  One is still
	faced with the same old questions of how does one move the data and how
	does one interpret it.


	The specifics of the DICOM message format are very similar to the
	previous versions of ACR/NEMA on which it is based.  The data dictionary
	is greatly extended, and certain data elements have been "retired" but
	can be ignored gracefully if present.  The message itself can now be
	transmitted as a byte stream over networks, rather than using a
	point-to-point paradigm excusively (though the old point-to-point
	interface is available).  This message can be encoded in various
	different Transfer Syntaxes for transmission.


	When two devices ("Application Entities" or AE) begin to establish an
	"Association", they negotiate an appropriate transfer syntax.  They may
	choose an Explicit Big-Endian Transfer Syntax in which integers are
	encoded as big-endian and where each data element includes a specific
	field that says "I am an unsigned 16 bit integer" or "I am an ascii
	floating-point number", or alternatively they can fall back on the
	default transfer syntax which every AE must support, the Implicit
	Little-Endian Transfer Syntax which is just the same as an old ACR/NEMA
	message with the byte order defined once and for all.


	This is all very well if you are using DICOM as it was originally
	envisaged - talking over a network, negotiating an association, and
	determining what Transfer Syntax to use.  What if one wants to store a
	DICOM message in a file though ?  Who is to say which transfer syntax
	one will use to encode it offline ?  One approach, used for example by
	the Central Test Node software produced by Mallinkrodt and used in the
	RSNA Inforad demonstrations, is just to store it in the default
	little-endian implicit syntax and be done with it.  This is obviously
	not good enough if one is going to be mailing tapes, floppies and
	optical disks between sites and vendors though, and hence the DICOM
	group decided to define a "Media Storage & File Format" part of the
	standard, the new Parts 10, 11 and 12 which have recently passed their
	ballot and should be available in final form from NEMA soon.


	Amongst other things, Part 10 defines a generic DICOM file format that
	contains a brief header, the "DICOM File Meta Information Header" which
	contains a 128 byte preamble (that the user can fill with anything), a 4
	byte DICOM prefix "DICM", then a short DICOM format message that
	contains newly defined elements of group 0002 in a specified Transfer
	Syntax, which uniquely identify the data set as well as specifying the
	Transfer Syntax for the rest of the file.  The rest of the message must
	specify a single SOP instance.  The length of the brief message in the
	Meta Information Header is specified in the first data element as usual,
	the group length.


	Originally the draft of Part 10 specified the default Implicit Value
	Representation Little Endian Transfer Syntax as the DICOM File Meta
	Information Header Transfer Syntax, which is in keeping with the concept
	that it is the default for all other parts of the standard.  The final
	text fortunately changed this to Explicit Value Representation Little
	Endian Transfer Syntax.


	So what choices of Transfer Syntax does one have and why all the fuss ?
	Well the biggest distinction is between implicit and explicit value
	representation which allows for multiple possible representations for a
	single element, in theory at least, and perhaps allows one to make more
	of an unknown data element than one otherwise could perhaps.  Some
	purists (and Interfile people) would argue that the element should be
	identified descriptively, and there is nothing to stop someone from
	defining their own private Transfer Syntax that does just that (what a
	heretical thought, wash my mouth out with soap).  With regard to the
	little vs.  big endian debate I can't see what the fuss is about, as it
	can't really be a serious performance issue.


	Perhaps more importantly in the long run, the Transfer Syntax mechanism
	provides a means for encapsulating compressed data streams, without
	having to deal with the vagaries and mechanics of compression in the
	standard itself.  For example, if DICOM version 3.0, in addition to the
	"normal" Transfer Syntaxes, a series are defined to correspond to each
	of the Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) processes.  Each one of
	these Transfer Syntaxes encodes data elements in the normal way, except
	for the image pixel data, which is defined to be encoded as a valid and
	self-contained JPEG byte stream.  Both reversible and irreversible
	processes of various types are provided for, without having to mess with
	the intricacies of encoding the various tables and parameters that JPEG
	processes require.  Presumably a display application that supports such
	a Transfer Syntax will just chop out the byte stream, pass it to the
	relevant JPEG decode, and get an uncompressed image back.


	Contrast this approach with that taken by those defining the TIFF
	(Tagged Image File Format) for general imaging and page layout
	applications.  In their version 6.0 standard they attempted to
	disassemble the JPEG stream into its various components and assign each
	to a specific tag.  Unfortunately this proved to be unworkable after the
	standard was disseminated and they have gone back to the drawing board.


	Now one may not like the JPEG standard, but one cannot argue with the
	fact that the scheme is workable, and a readily available means of
	reversible compression has been incorporated painlessly.  How effective
	a compression scheme this is remains to be determined, and whether or
	not the irreversible modes gain wide acceptance will be dictated by the
	usual medico-legal paranoia that prevails in the United States, but the
	option is there for those who want to take it up.  Though originally
	every conceivable JPEG (ISO 10918-1) compression process was defined in
	the standard, recently all but the most commonly used (8 and 12 bit DCT
	lossy huffman and 16 bit lossless huffman) have been retired.  There is
	of course no reason why private compression schemes cannot be readily
	incorporated using this "encapsulation" mechanism, and to preserve
	bandwidth this will undoubtedly occur.  This will not compromise
	compatibility though, as one can always fall back to a default,
	uncompressed Transfer Syntax.  More recently, JPEG-LS and JPEG 2000 have
	also been added to the standard.  RLE (Run Length Encoded) compression,
	using the TIFF PackBits mechanism, is also present in the standard and
	is used for Ultrasound applications (only, as far as I know).


	In order to identify all these various syntaxes, information objects,
	and so on, DICOM has adopted the ISO concept of the Unique Identifier
	(UID) which is a text string of numbers and periods with a unique root
	for each organization that is registered with ISO and various
	organizations that in turn register others in a hierarchical fashion.
	For example 1.2.840.10008.1.2 is defined as the Implicit VR Little
	Endian Transfer Syntax.  The 1 identifies ISO, the 2 is the ISO member
	body branch, the 840 is the specific member body country code, in this
	case ANSI, and the 10008 is registered by ANSI to NEMA for DICOM.  UID's
	are also used to uniqely identify non-DICOM specific things, such as
	information objects.  What DICOM calls "UIDs" are referred to in the ISO
	OSI world as Object Identifiers (OIDs).


	UIDs are constructed from a prefix registered to the supplier or vendor
	or site, and a unique suffix that may be generated from say a date and
	time stamp (which is not to be parsed).  For example an instance of a CT
	information object might have a UID of
	1.2.840.123456.2.999999.940623.170717 where a (presumably US) vendor
	registered 123456, and the modality generated a unique suffix based on
	its device number, patient hospital id, date and time, which have no
	other significance other than to create a unique suffix.  Each vendor of
	a DICOM implementation needs a UID root from which to begin generating
	their own UIDs.  See UID - Getting a Registered Organization Number for
	a DICOM UID Root for details.  It is said that Joint ISO-ITU root form
	of "2.16.country" is currently preferred over the "1.country" form of
	the root, which is something to bear in mind when building your own root
	once you are a registered number.  Picker for example uses
	"2.16.840.1.113662" as their root.  GE uses "1.2.840.113619".  The "840"
	is the country code for US (there is an assumption that there is one
	member body per country responsible for registration) using ISO 3166
	numeric country codes.  I am not sure why there is a "1" after the
	"2.16.840", but one does not seem to need to add a "1" after "1.2.840"
	using the ISO registration scheme.  I am also not sure if the "1" after
	the "840" is a US thing only for joint registrations, or whether other
	countries use the "1" also.  Note that one does NOT zero-pad UID
	components, hence the three-letter ISO 3166 code for Brazil of "076"
	would actually be used as "76", e.g.  "1.2.76.xxxxxx".  This is
	something to take great care with when generating the unique suffix for
	a particular UID (e.g.  don't use serial number "002456" but "2456"
	instead).


	The other important new concept that DICOM introduced was the concept of
	Information Objects.  In the previous ACR/NEMA standard, though
	modalities were identified by a specific data element, and though there
	were rules about which data elements were mandatory, conditional or
	optional in ceratin settings, the concept was relatively loosely
	defined.  Presumably in order to provide a mechanism to allow
	conformance to be specified and hence ensure interoperability, various
	Information Objects are defined that are composed of sets of Modules,
	each module containing a specific set of data elements that are present
	or absent according to specific rules.


	For example, a CT Image Information Object contains amongst others, a
	Patient module, a General Equipment module, a CT Image module, and an
	Image Pixel module.  An MR Image Information module would contain all of
	these except the CT Image module which would be replaced by an MR Image
	module.  Clearly one needs descriptive information about a CT image that
	is different from an MR image, yet the commonality of the image pixel
	data and the patient information is recognized by this model.


	Hence, as described earlier, one can define pairs of Information Objects
	and Services that operate on such objects (Storage, Query/Retrieve,
	etc.) and one gets SOP classes and instances.  All very object oriented
	and initially confusing perhaps, but it provides a mechanism for
	specifying conformance.  From the point of view of an interpreters of a
	DICOM compatible data stream this means that for a certain instance of
	an Information Object, certain information is guaranteed to be in there,
	which is nice.  As a creator of such a data stream, one must ensure that
	one follows all the rules to make sure that all the data elements from
	all the necessary modules are present.


	Having done so one then just throws all the data elements together,
	sorts them into ascending order by group and element order, and pumps
	them out.  It is a shame that the data stream itself doesn't reflect the
	underlying order in the Information Objects, but I guess they had to
	maintain backward compatibility, hence this little bit of ugliness.
	This gets worse when one considers how to put more than one object in a
	folder inside another object.


	At this point I am tempted to include more details of various different
	modules, data elements and transfer syntaxes, as well as the TCP/IP
	mechanism for connection.  However all this information is in the
	standard itself, copies of which are readily available electronically
	from ftp sites, and in the interests of brevity I will not succumb to
	temptation at this time.


	2.2.1 Localizer lines on DICOM images

	  A specific topic that is frequently asked in comp.protocols.dicom is
	  how to use display an image
of a "localizer" (or "scout" or "scanogram" or "topogram" depending on your
vendor) that has the "lines" corresponding to orthogonal images displayed on it.
This applies both in the case where the orthogonal images were "graphically
prescribed" from the localizer as well as when one just wants to see the
location of images that happen to be orthogonal.  In the case of CT images, the
localizer is usually a specific image that is not really a cross-section but a
projection image.  In the case of MR one or more sagittal or coronal images are
usually obtained from which axial images are prescribed, and so on.  The problem
of "posting" the location of the orthogonal images on a localizer involves:


      -Determining which image or images is/are the localizer for a particular
      set of images: some vendors send this information in the "Referenced Image
      Sequence" attribute, in the case of CT it may simply be an image with an
      "Image Type" value 3 of "LOCALIZER" (this doesn't apply to MR) and the
      same Frame of Reference UID, and in other cases one just has to search the
      entire set of images and find other likely candidates that are orthogonal
      or close to it based on "Image Orientation(Patient)".  -Having identified
      a localizer and a list of images whose locations are to be "posted",
      drawing the appropriate lines: there are two approaches that are
      fundamentally different conceptually.  One can either determine the
      intersection between the planes and extents of the localizer and the
      orthogonal image, or one can project the boundaries of the orthogonal
      image onto the plane of the localizer.


      The problem with the "intersection" approach is that no such intersection
      may exist.  For example, CT localizers are theoretically of infinite
      thickness, they are projections not slices, and hence the concept of
      intersection does not apply.  Even in the case of orthogonal slices, the
      boundaries of one slice may not intersect the orthogonal slice at all.
      The users requirement is really not to show the intersection, but rather
      to "project" the boundaries of a slice onto the plane of the localizer, as
      if it were viewed from a position along the normal to the plane of the
      localizer.  For the purposes of simplicity, perspective is ignored.
      Strictly speaking, the projected boundaries form a polygon, but if the
      slices are truly orthogonal the polygon will appear as a straight line
      (which is what most users expect to see).


      The approach I use is to perform a parallel projection of the plane and
      extent of the source slice onto the plane of the target
 localizer image.  One can think of various ways of calculating angles between
 planes, dropping normals, etc., but there is a simple approach ...


       If one considers the localizer plane as a "viewport" onto the DICOM 3D
       coordinate space, then that viewport is described by
 its origin, its row unit vector, column unit vector and a normal unit vector
 (derived from the row and column vectors by taking the cross product).  Now if
 one moves the origin to 0,0,0 and rotates this viewing plane such that the row
 vector is in the +X direction, the column vector the +Y direction, and the
 normal in the +Z direction, then one has a situation where the X coordinate now
 represents a column offset in mm from the localizer's top left hand corner, and
 the Y coordinate now represents a row offset in mm from the localizer's top
 left hand corner, and the Z coordinate can be ignored.  One can then convert
 the X and Y mm offsets into pixel offsets using the pixel spacing of the
 localizer image.


       This trick is neat, because the actual rotations can be specified
       entirely using the direction cosines that are the row,
 column and normal unit vectors, without having to figure out any angles, arc
 cosines and sines, which octant of the 3D space one is dealing with, etc.
 Indeed, simplified it looks like:


dst_nrm_dircos_x = dst_row_dircos_y * dst_col_dircos_z - dst_row_dircos_z *
dst_col_dircos_y; dst_nrm_dircos_y = dst_row_dircos_z * dst_col_dircos_x -
dst_row_dircos_x * dst_col_dircos_z; dst_nrm_dircos_z = dst_row_dircos_x *
dst_col_dircos_y - dst_row_dircos_y * dst_col_dircos_x;

src_pos_x -= dst_pos_x; src_pos_y -= dst_pos_y; src_pos_z -= dst_pos_z;

dst_pos_x = dst_row_dircos_x * src_pos_x
	  + dst_row_dircos_y * src_pos_y + dst_row_dircos_z * src_pos_z;

dst_pos_y = dst_col_dircos_x * src_pos_x
	  + dst_col_dircos_y * src_pos_y + dst_col_dircos_z * src_pos_z;

dst_pos_z = dst_nrm_dircos_x * src_pos_x
	  + dst_nrm_dircos_y * src_pos_y + dst_nrm_dircos_z * src_pos_z;


       The traditional homogeneous transformation matrix form of this is:


[ dst_row_dircos_x dst_row_dircos_y dst_row_dircos_z -dst_pos_x ] [
dst_col_dircos_x dst_col_dircos_y dst_col_dircos_z -dst_pos_y ] [
dst_nrm_dircos_x dst_nrm_dircos_y dst_nrm_dircos_z -dst_pos_z ] [ 0 0 0 1 ]


       So this tells you how to transform arbitrary 3D points into localizer
       pixel offset space (which then obviously need to be
 clipped to the localizer boundaries for drawing), but which points to draw ?


       My approach is to project the square that is the bounding box of the
       source image (i.e.  lines joining the TLHC,
 TRHC,BRHC and BLHC of the slice).  That way, if the slice is orthogonal to the
 localizer the square will project as a single line (i.e.  all four lines will
 pile up on top of each other), and if it is not, some sort of rectangle or
 trapezoid will be drawn.  I rather like the effect and it provides a general
 solution, though looks messy with a lot of slices with funky angulations.
 Other possibilities are just draw the longest projected side, draw a diagonal,
 etc.

      Do not get too carried away with the precision of the resulting image.
      There is some controversy as to whether or not the coordinates in Image
      Position (Patient) represent the center of the slice or the edge of it,
      and if the edge which edge (leading or trailing with respect to scan
      "direction", top or bottom with respect to some axis, etc.).  Obviously
      the center is the most sensible choice but you cannot guarantee this
      (though a recent CP to the standard specifies that it is in fact the
      center of the slice - see CP 212).  Just be aware that the displayed lines
      (and recorded location) may be +/- the slice thickness (or perhaps
      spacing) with respect to the orthogonal localizer image.


      Do not forget to check that the Frame of Reference UID is the same for
      both the localizer and the orthogonal images to be posted.  If they are
      different one cannot assume the coordinates and vectors are using the same
      coordinate space.


      Finally, some vendors (especially on older scanners) provide the user with
      an ability to post the localizer on the acquisition device and to save
      that image, either as a secondary capture object with the lines burned
      into the pixel data, or using some form of overlay.  There is considerable
      variation in the choice of overlay mechanism to use, and not very
      consistent support for overlays in other vendors workstations.  This leads
      to frustrated users who can't see the lines on third party workstations
      even though they are supposed to be there.  Hopefully in future vendors
      will consistently make use of the new Grayscale Softcopy Presentation
      State Storage objects to store such graphics, and to fill in "Referenced
      Image Sequence" to allow workstations to post the localizers themselves
      without hunting for plausible candidates.  The IHE Technical Framework for
      Year 3 specifies that Referenced Image Sequence shall be used and burned
      in lines shall not, which hopefully provides direction for new devices.


      There are various implementations of this and other algorithms that may be
      of interest at the following sites:


      - http://www.dclunie.com/dicom3tools.html in my dicom3tools: look for
      "appsrc/dctools/dcpost.cc" -
      http://www.dclunie.com/dicom3tools/workinprogress/dcpost.cc dcpost.cc
      (won't compile by itself, but shows the algorithm) -
      ftp://ftp.charm.net/pub/usr/home2/dcsipo/slices.ZIP from Dee Csipo -
      http://www.tiani.com/JDicom/out/scouts4j.zip from Gunter Zeilinger (Java)
      - http://www.tiani.com/JDicom/out/scouts4cxx.zip from Gunter Zeilinger
      (C++)








	 2.2.2 Orientation of DICOM images

	  Another question that is frequently asked in comp.protocols.dicom is
	  how to determine which side of an image is which (e.g.  left, right)
	  and so on.  The short answer is that for projection radiographs this
	  is specified explicitly using the Patient Orientation attribute, and
	  for cross-sectional images it needs to be derived from the Image
	  Orientation (Patient) direction cosines.  In the standard these are
	  explained as follows:


      -"C.7.6.1.1.1 Patient Orientation.
The Patient Orientation (0020,0020) relative to the image plane shall be
specified by two values that designate the anatomical direction of the positive
row axis (left to right) and the positive column axis (top to bottom).  The
first entry is the direction of the rows, given by the direction of the last
pixel in the first row from the first pixel in that row.  The second entry is
the direction of the columns, given by the direction of the last pixel in the
first column from the first pixel in that column.

Anatomical direction shall be designated by the capital letters: A (anterior), P
(posterior), R (right), L (left), H (head), F (foot).  Each value of the
orientation attribute shall contain at least one of these characters.  If
refinements in the orientation descriptions are to be specified, then they shall
be designated by one or two additional letters in each value.  Within each
value, the letters shall be ordered with the principal orientation designated in
the first character."
      -"C.7.6.2.1.1 Image Position And Image Orientation.
The Image Position (0020,0032) specifies the x, y, and z coordinates of the
upper left hand corner of the image; it is the center of the first voxel
transmitted.  Image Orientation (0020,0037) specifies the direction cosines of
the first row and the first column with respect to the patient.  These
Attributes shall be provide as a pair.  Row value for the x, y, and z axes
respectively followed by the Column value for

the x, y, and z axes respectively.

The direction of the axes is defined fully by the patient's orientation.  The
x-axis is increasing to the left hand side of the patient.  The y-axis is
increasing to the posterior side of the patient.  The z-axis is increasing
toward the head of the patient.

The patient based coordinate system is a right handed system, i.e.  the
 vector cross product of a unit vector along the positive x-axis and a
unit vector along the positive y-axis is equal to a unit vector along the
positive z-axis."


      Some simple code to take one of the direction cosines (vectors) from the
      Image Orientation (Patient) attribute and generate strings equivalent to
      one of the values of Patient Orientation looks like this (noting that if
      the vector is not aligned exactly with one of the major axes, the
      resulting string will have multiple letters in as described under
      "refinements" in C.7.6.1.1.1):


char * DerivedImagePlane::getOrientation(Vector3D vector) {
	char *orientation=new char[4]; char *optr = orientation; *optr='\0';

	char orientationX = vector.getX() < 0 ?  'R' : 'L'; char orientationY =
	vector.getY() < 0 ?  'A' : 'P'; char orientationZ = vector.getZ() < 0 ?
	'F' : 'H';

	double absX = fabs(vector.getX()); double absY = fabs(vector.getY());
	double absZ = fabs(vector.getZ());

	int i; for (i=0; i<3; ++i) {
		if (absX>.0001 && absX>absY && absX>absZ) {
			*optr++=orientationX; absX=0;
		} else if (absY>.0001 && absY>absX && absY>absZ) {
			*optr++=orientationY; absY=0;
		} else if (absZ>.0001 && absZ>absX && absZ>absY) {
			*optr++=orientationZ; absZ=0;
		} else break; *optr='\0';
	} return orientation;
}





	 2.2.3 Determining the Transfer Syntax of DICOM input Streams

	  Another question that is frequently asked in comp.protocols.dicom is
	  how to read a DICOM dataset from, for example, a file, whether or not
	  there is a PS 3.10 style meta information header.


	  Firstly, if a DICOMDIR is being, it is always written with explicit VR
	  little endian transfer syntax, and a meta information header is always
	  present.  Note also that DICOMDIRs are never sent over the network;
	  they are purely an interchange media object.


	  The meta information header is preceeded by a 128 byte preamble and
	  then the bytes 'DICM' as a magic number.


	  The meta-information that precedes the dataset of a PS 3.10 file is
	  always written in explicit VR little endian transfer syntax, and
	  contains within it tags which describe the succeeding dataset,
	  including what transfer syntax it is encoded in, something that needs
	  to be extracted and interpreted before proceeding to read past the end
	  of the meta information header and into the dataset.  Note that the
	  group length of the meta information header elements is mandatory and
	  can be used to determine the end of the meta information header (i.e.,
	  when to change transfer syntaxes).  Note that a draft of PS 3.10
	  before the final text suggested implicit VR for the meta-information
	  header, and some older applications may use that internally - these
	  non-DICOM files should never see the light of day however, and you can
	  probably forget about this.


	  The dataset following the meta information header will have the
	  specified transfer syntax, which obviously may be different from the
	  explicit VR little endian transfer syntax of the meta information
	  header itself.  In the case of the most transfer syntaxes the encoding
	  of the data elements will subtly change at this point.  In the case of
	  compressed pixel data transfer syntaxes everything will be the same as
	  the explicit VR little endian transfer syntax until one reaches
	  undefined length (7fe0,0010) elements.  In the case of the deflated
	  compression transfer syntax, the defalted (zipped without the zip
	  header) bit stream will begin immediately after the last meta
	  information header attribute.


	  When one is unfortunate enough to encounter a file that has no
	  preamble and meta information header, then one has to guess the
	  transfer syntax, for example by assuming the object starts with low
	  group numbered tags and using the values of the first 16 bits to guess
	  big or little endian, and looking for upper case letters where an
	  explicit VR might be, and determining explicit or implicit VR from
	  that.


	  Note however, that there is no random intermingling of implicit and
	  explicit value representations.  The transfer syntax dictates that
	  either one or the other is used throughout, after the meta information
	  header has been read.


	  Having said that, if you are reading something encoded in implicit VR,
	  then you can a) ignore the value by simply skipping it (using the VL
	  field), or b) interpret the value if you need to use it for something.
	  In the latter case you need to know in advance what the VR "should
	  be", i.e.  you need a dictionary.  However, that dictionary only needs
	  to be as long as the attributes you need to interpret ...  all the
	  others can be skipped passively.


	  Note that it is NEVER necessary to test on the fly on a per-element
	  basis whether or not the value representation is implicit or explicit.
	  This is always decided before you start.  Either you know the entire
	  dataset is explicit or implicit because you read the meta-information,
	  found the transfer syntax uid specified there and decided to switch to
	  that transfer syntax after the meta-information (the length of which
	  is always specified and tells you when to switch), or there was no
	  meta-information and you used some heuristic (or command line switch)
	  to decide what the transfer syntax is.

Here is one approach to handling the meta information header and guessing the
transfer syntax if none is present, written in C++, much as it is done in
dicom3tools:

void DicomInputStream::initializeTransferSyntax(const char *uid,bool meta) {
	TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = 0; TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = 0; //
	First make use of command line parameters that override guesswork ...
	if (uid) {
		TransferSyntax *ts = new TransferSyntax(uid); if (meta) {
			TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = ts; // specified UID is
			transfer syntax to read metaheader
		} else {
			TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = ts; // specified UID is
			transfer syntax to read dataset (there is no metaheader)
		}
	} // else transfer syntax has to be determined by either guesswork or
	metaheader ...  char b[8]; if (meta) {
		// test for metaheader prefix after 128 byte preamble
		seekg(128,ios::beg); if (good() && read(b,4) &&
		strncmp(b,"DICM",4) == 0) {
			if (!TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader)
			TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = // guess only if not
			specified on command line
				read(b,6) && isupper(b[4]) && isupper(b[5]) ?
				new
				TransferSyntax(ExplicitVRLittleEndianTransferSyntaxUID)
				// standard : new
				TransferSyntax(ImplicitVRLittleEndianTransferSyntaxUID);
				// old draft (e.g.  used internally on GE IOS
				platform)

			// leaves positioned at start of metaheader
			seekg(128+4,ios::beg);
		} else {
			clear(); seekg(0,ios::beg); // reset stream since
			metaheader was sought but not found
			TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet=TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader;
			TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader=0;
		}
	} if (!TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet && !TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader) {
	// was not specified on the command line and there is no metaheader
		bool bigendian = false; bool explicitvr = false; clear();
		seekg(0,ios::beg); if (good() && read(b,8)) {
			// examine probable group number ...  assume <= 0x00ff
			if (b[0] < b[1]) bigendian=true; else if (b[0] == 0 &&
			b[1] == 0) {
				// blech ...  group number is zero // no point
				in looking at element number // as it will
				probably be zero too (group length) // try the
				32 bit value length of implicit vr if (b[4] <
				b[7]) bigendian=true;
			} // else littleendian if (isupper(b[4]) &&
			isupper(b[5])) explicitvr=true;
		} // else unrecognized ...  assume default if (bigendian)
			if (explicitvr)
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(ExplicitVRBigEndianTransferSyntaxUID);
			else
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(ImplicitVR,BigEndian);
		else
			if (explicitvr)
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(ExplicitVRLittleEndianTransferSyntaxUID);
			else
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(ImplicitVRLittleEndianTransferSyntaxUID);
		// leaves positioned at start of dataset clear();
		seekg(0,ios::beg);
	} TransferSyntaxInUse = TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader ?
	TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader : TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet;
	Assert(TransferSyntaxInUse);
	setEndian(TransferSyntaxInUse->getEndian());
}

Here is the same sort of thing in Java, paraphrasing the PixelMed Java DICOM
toolkit:

private void initializeTransferSyntax(String uid,boolean tryMeta) throws
IOException {
	TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = null; TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet =
	null; byte b[] = new byte[8]; // First make use of argument that
	overrides guesswork at transfer syntax ...  if (uid != null) {
		TransferSyntax ts = new TransferSyntax(uid); if (tryMeta) {
			TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = ts; // specified UID is
			transfer syntax to read metaheader
		} else {
			TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = ts; // specified UID is
			transfer syntax to read dataset (there is no metaheader)
		}
	} // else transfer syntax has to be determined by either guesswork or
	metaheader ...  if (tryMeta) {
		// test for metaheader prefix after 128 byte preamble if
		(markSupported()) mark(140); if (skip(128) == 128 && read(b,0,4)
		== 4 && new String(b,0,4).equals("DICM")) {
			if (TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader == null) { // guess
			only if not specified as an argument
				if (markSupported()) {
					mark(8); if (read(b,0,6) == 6) { // the
					first 6 bytes of the first attribute tag
					in the metaheader
						TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader =
							Character.isUpperCase((char)(b[4]))
							&&
							Character.isUpperCase((char)(b[5]))
							?  new
							TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ExplicitVRLittleEndian)
							// standard : new
							TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ImplicitVRLittleEndian);
							// old draft (e.g.  used
							internally on GE IOS
							platform)
					} else {
						TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader =
						new
						TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ExplicitVRLittleEndian);
					} reset();
				} else {
					// can't guess since can't rewind ...
					insist on standard transfer syntax
					TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader = new
					TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ExplicitVRLittleEndian);
				}
			} byteOffsetOfStartOfData=132;
		} else {
			// no preamble, so rewind and try using the specified
			transfer syntax (if any) for the dataset instead if
			(markSupported()) {
				reset(); TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet =
				TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader; // may be null
				anyway if no uid argument specified
				byteOffsetOfStartOfData=0;
			} else {
				throw new IOException("Not a DICOM PS 3.10 file
				- no DICM after preamble in metaheader, and
				can't rewind input");
			}
		}
	} // at this point either we have succeeded or failed at finding a
	metaheader, or we didn't look // so we either have a detected or
	specified transfer syntax for the metaheader, or the dataset, or nothing
	at all if (TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet == null &&
	TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader == null) { // was not specified as an
	argument and there is no metaheader
		boolean bigendian = false; boolean explicitvr = false; if
		(markSupported()) {
			mark(10); if (read(b,0,8) == 8) {
				// examine probable group number ...  assume <=
				0x00ff if (b[0] < b[1]) bigendian=true; else if
				(b[0] == 0 && b[1] == 0) {
					// blech ...  group number is zero // no
					point in looking at element number // as
					it will probably be zero too (group
					length) // try the 32 bit value length
					of implicit vr if (b[4] < b[7])
					bigendian=true;
				} // else little endian if
				(Character.isUpperCase((char)(b[4])) &&
				Character.isUpperCase((char)(b[5])))
				explicitvr=true;
			} // go back to start of dataset reset();
		} // else can't guess or unrecognized ...  assume default
		ImplicitVRLittleEndian (most common without metaheader due to
		Mallinckrodt CTN default) if (bigendian)
			if (explicitvr)
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ExplicitVRBigEndian);
			else
				throw new IOException("Not a DICOM file
				(masquerades as explicit VR big endian)");
		else
			if (explicitvr)
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ExplicitVRLittleEndian);
			else
				TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet = new
				TransferSyntax(TransferSyntax.ImplicitVRLittleEndian);
	}

	TransferSyntaxInUse = TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader != null ?
	TransferSyntaxToReadMetaHeader : TransferSyntaxToReadDataSet; if
	(TransferSyntaxInUse == null) throw new IOException("Not a DICOM file
	(or can't detect Transfer Syntax)");
	setEndian(TransferSyntaxInUse.isBigEndian()); // leaves us positioned at
	start of group and element tags (for either metaheader or dataset)
}






    2.3 Papyrus


	Papyrus is an image file format based on ACR/NEMA version 2.0.  It was
	developed by the Digital Imaging Unit of the University Hospital of
	Geneva for the European project on telemedicine (TELEMED project of the
	RACE program), under the leadership of Dr.  Osman Ratib
	(osman@cih.hcuge.ch).  The University Hospital of Geneva uses Papyrus
	for their hospital-wide PACS.


	The medical file format component of Papyrus version 2 extended the
	ACR/NEMA format, particularly in order to reference multiple images by
	placing folder information referencing ACR-NEMA data sets in a shadow
	(private) group.  Contributing to the development of DICOM 3, the team
	are updating their format to be compatible with the offline file format
	provisions of the draft Part 10 of DICOM 3 in Papyrus version 3.


	The specifications, toolkit and image manipulation software that is
	Papyrus aware, Osiris, is available for the Mac, Windows, and
	Unix/X11/Motif by ftp from ftp://expasy.hcuge.ch/pub/.


	See also Papyrus and Osiris.


	Further information is available in printed form.  Contact
	yves@cih.hcuge.ch (Yves Ligier).

    2.4 Interfile V3.3


	Interfile is a "file format for the exchange of nuclear medicine image
	data" created I gather to satisfy the needs of the European COST B2
	Project for the transfer of images of quality control phantoms, and
	incorporates the AAPM (American Association of Physicists in Medicine)
	Report No.  10, and has been subsequently used for clinical work.


	It specifies a file format composed of ascii "key-value" pairs and a
	data dictionary of keys.  The binary image data may be contained in the
	same file as the "administrative information", or in a separate file
	pointed to by a "name of data file" key.  Image data may be binary
	integers, IEEE floating point values, or ascii and the byte order is
	specified by a key "imagedata byte order".  The order of keys is defined
	by the Interfile syntax which is more sophisticated than a simple list
	of keys, allowing for groups, conditionals and loops to dictate the
	order of key-value pairs.


	Conformance to the Interfile standard is informally described in terms
	of which types of image data types, pixel types, multiple windows,
	special Interfile features including curves, and restriction to various
	maximum recommended limits.


	Interfile is specifically NOT a communications protocol and strictly
	deals with offline files.  There are efforts to extend Interfile to
	include modalities other than nuclear medicine, as well as to keep
	ACR/NEMA and Interfile data dictionaries in some kind of harmony.


	A sample list of Interfile 3.3 key-value pairs is shown here to give you
	some idea of the flavor of the format.  The example is culled from part
	of a Static study in the Interfile standard document and is not
	complete:


		!INTERFILE := !imaging modality :=nucmed !version of keys :=3.3
		data description :=static patient name :=joe doe !patient ID
		:=12345 patient dob :=1968:08:21 patient sex :=M !study ID
		:=test exam type :=test data compression :=none !image number
		:=1 !matrix size [1] :=64 !matrix size [2] :=64 !number format
		:=signed integer !number of bytes per pixel :=2 !image duration
		(sec) :=100 image start time :=10:20: 0 total counts :=8512 !END
		OF INTERFILE :=


	One can see how easy such a format would be to extend, as well as how it
	is readable and almost useable without reference to any standard
	document or data dictionary.


	Undoubtedly ACR/NEMA DICOM 3.0 to Interfile translators will soon
	proliferate in view of the fact that many Nuclear Medicine vendors
	supply Interfile translators at present.


	To get hold of the Interfile 3.3 standard, see the Interfile sources,
	Interfile information contacts and Interfile mailing list described
	later in this document.


    2.5 Qsh


	Qsh is a family of programs for manipulating images, and it defines an
	intermediate file format.  The following information was derived with
	the help of one of the authors maguire@it.kth.se(Chip Maguire):


	Uses an ASCII key-value-pair (KVP sic.) system, based on the AAPM Report
	#10 proposal.  This format influenced both Interfile and ACR-NEMA
	(DICOM).  The file format is referred to as "IMAGE" in some of their
	articles (see references).  The header and the image data are stored as
	two separate files with extensions *.qhd and *.qim respectively.


	Qsh is available by anonymous ftp from the Qsh ftp site.  This is a
	seriously large tar file, including as it does some sample images, and
	lots of source code, as well as some post-script documents.  Subtrees
	are available as separate tar files.


	QSH's Motif-based menu system (qmenu) will work with OpenWindows 3.0 if
	SUN patch number 100444-54 for SUNOS 4.1.3 rev.  A is applied.  The
	patch is available from ftp://sunsolve1.sun.com (192.9.9.24).


	The image access subroutines take the same parameters as the older
	/usr/image package from UNC, however, the actual subroutines support the
	qsh KVP and image data files.


	The frame buffer access subroutines take the same parameters as the
	Univ.  of Utah software (of the mid.  1970s).  The design is based on
	the use of a virtual frame buffer which is then implemented via a
	library for a specific frame buffer.  There exists a version of the the
	display routines for X11.


	Conversions are not supported any longer, instead there is a commercial
	product called InterFormat.  InterFormat includes a qsh to Interfile
	conversion, along with DICOM to qsh, and many others.  Information is
	available from reddy@nucmed.med.nyu.edu (David Reddy) (see InterFormat
	in the Sources section).


	[Editorial note: this seems a bit of a shame to me - the old
	distribution included lots of handy bits of information, particularly on
	driving tape drives.  I am advised however that the conversion stuff was
	pulled out because people wanted it supported, the authors were worried
	they were disclosing things perhaps they ought not to be, and NYU had
	switched to using InterFormat themselves anyway.  DAC.]


	The authors of the qsh package are:


	       - maguire@it.kth.se (Gerald Q.  (Chip) Maguire) -
	       noz@nucmed.NYU.EDU (Marilyn E Noz)


	The following references are helpful in understanding the philosophy
	behind the file format, and are included in postscript form in the qsh
	ftp distribution:


	@Article[noz88b,
		Key=<noz88b>, Author=<M.  E.  Noz and G.  Q.  Maguire Jr.>,
		Title=<QSH: A Minimal but Highly Portable Image Display
		       and Processing Toolkit>,
		Journal=<Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine>,
		volume=<27>, month=<November>, Year=<1988>, Pages=<229-240>
	] @Article[maguire89e,
		Key=<maguire>, Author=<G.Q.  Maguire Jr., and M.E.  Noz>,
		Title=<Image Formats: Five Years after the AAPM Standard Format
		for Digital Image Interchange>, Journal=<Medical Physics>,
		volume=<16>, month=<September/October>, year=<1989>,
		pages=<818-823>, comment=<Also as CUCS-369-88>
	]

    2.6 DEFF


	DEFF (Data Exchange File Format) is a portable image file format
	designed for the exchange, printing and archiving of ultrasound images.
	It is written by John Bono of ATL from whom the specification may be
	obtained.  The latest version is 2.5, March 25, 1994.  It is based on
	the TIFF 5.0 specification, though a more recent version, TIFF 6.0 is
	available.


	Theorectically, any TIFF reader should be able to read the standard tags
	from a DEFF image, so long as only 8 bit images are in use, as in the
	Camera Ready class of DEFF images for instance.  Additional support is
	provided for multi-frame images, and 9 to 16 bit images by extending the
	TIFF format.  Because Aldus only allocates a small number of unique
	registered tags to each vendor, ATL have defined their own extensive set
	of additional tags, which are referenced by using one of the registered
	tags ExtendedTagsOffset.  Hence these additional tags will not be
	visible to a conventional TIFF reader.


The next part is part3 - proprietary CT formats.


User Contributions:

Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA




Part1 - Part2 - Part3 - Part4 - Part5 - Part6 - Part7 - Part8

[ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ]

Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer:
dclunie@dclunie.com (David A. Clunie)





Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:11 PM