Rocksolid Light

Welcome to Rocksolid Light

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

"When anyone says `theoretically,' they really mean `not really.'" -- David Parnas


devel / comp.protocols.dicom / Re: Offline image review in Aria

SubjectAuthor
* Offline image review in AriaMike Courtney
`- Offline image review in Ariaaje...@radformation.com

1
Offline image review in Aria

<3725c3cc-d0a7-4cea-bad2-9e13cdf03333n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://news.novabbs.org/devel/article-flat.php?id=1443&group=comp.protocols.dicom#1443

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dicom
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:181:b0:3b9:e0b5:1f8e with SMTP id s1-20020a05622a018100b003b9e0b51f8emr695649qtw.399.1675817776268;
Tue, 07 Feb 2023 16:56:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:169b:b0:163:9826:be51 with SMTP id
j27-20020a056870169b00b001639826be51mr104464oae.175.1675817775696; Tue, 07
Feb 2023 16:56:15 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dicom
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 16:56:15 -0800 (PST)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:6c44:107f:8592:8037:d18c:2a83:6d30;
posting-account=2c5NnAoAAAAFnQjPfpEa1hWXkNM0NlUa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:6c44:107f:8592:8037:d18c:2a83:6d30
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3725c3cc-d0a7-4cea-bad2-9e13cdf03333n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Offline image review in Aria
From: mikecourtney48@yahoo.com (Mike Courtney)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:56:16 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: Mike Courtney - Wed, 8 Feb 2023 00:56 UTC

We have a vendor indicating that we need to provide an RT Structure for the images that we have acquired if they are to be used for offline image review in Varian Aria.

My initial thought is that Aria likely needs at least the external patient contour, in support of basic bounds for dose calculations. But any insights or pointers would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Mike

Re: Offline image review in Aria

<4bd0cf83-8b7d-485e-a74b-0a9a5303a800n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://news.novabbs.org/devel/article-flat.php?id=1444&group=comp.protocols.dicom#1444

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dicom
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5b50:0:b0:3b8:6c16:ea5c with SMTP id n16-20020ac85b50000000b003b86c16ea5cmr1428273qtw.57.1675867829818;
Wed, 08 Feb 2023 06:50:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:c10d:b0:163:3738:1f60 with SMTP id
f13-20020a056870c10d00b0016337381f60mr368487oad.82.1675867829420; Wed, 08 Feb
2023 06:50:29 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.dicom
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 06:50:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <3725c3cc-d0a7-4cea-bad2-9e13cdf03333n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.254.26.26; posting-account=U0KOrQoAAACwrGDMeYo5fgCSYsVTi2Aw
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.254.26.26
References: <3725c3cc-d0a7-4cea-bad2-9e13cdf03333n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4bd0cf83-8b7d-485e-a74b-0a9a5303a800n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Offline image review in Aria
From: ajensen@radformation.com (aje...@radformation.com)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2023 14:50:29 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2461
 by: aje...@radformation. - Wed, 8 Feb 2023 14:50 UTC

Hi Mike, radiation oncology physicist here so I've used Offline Review a bit.

You are correct that an external contour for dose calculation is one reason they would want structures for offline review. Another calculation related use case is calculating dose volume histograms for individual contours.

The typical use of offline review is comparing patient images taken before/during/after treatment and comparing them to the patient images used for treatment planning. In this use case, sometimes you can compare anatomy directly without the need for contours (for example, does the lung tumor at treatment look ~ the same as it did at the time of treatment planning). However it often simpler to compare the treatment anatomy to the contour used for treatment planning (so in the same example you could compare the tumor at the time of treatment to the contour of the tumor from treatment planning). Also, there are geometric structures that don't have a direct anatomic partner that would require a contour to review. These are typically things like planning target volumes, which are expansions of the tumor volume that account for patient / tumor movement, patient setup variations, etc.

Hope that helps,
Andrew

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor