Enhanced CT Image Storage SOP Class was included in DICOM 2003, but new (2023) CT scanner still only support to export images with legacy (1993) Single-Frame CT Image Storage SOP Class.

Why?

On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 12:08:50 PM UTC-4, gunter zeilinger wrote:
> Enhanced CT Image Storage SOP Class was included in DICOM 2003, but new (2023) CT scanner still only support to export images with legacy (1993) Single-Frame CT Image Storage SOP Class.
>
> Why?

Good question, my best guesses:
1) Whatever problems that Enhanced CT were meant to solve lost urgency after 2003 as systems became more powerful (consider commodity hardware going multi-core, or at least HyperThreading), and the entire CT ecosystem which was already built up around 1000 objects / series could handle such series just fine, at modality, PACS, and apps.
2) Getting any portion of this ecosystem to change to the newer SOP would present interoperability challenges since some devices would only support old or new, thus the "successful" devices would be stuck having to support both types, probably not the end of the world but does overhead when the old SOP class works just fine, so why bother supporting two?
3) As time goes on, the backend does all of the CT processing, so the remote clients don't (and should not) receive this example 1000 object series directly, for the obvious reasons, thus applications would not benefit for using the newer SOP class.

-thanks

On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:49:46 AM UTC-7, Chris O'Donnell wrote:
> On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 12:08:50 PM UTC-4, gunter zeilinger wrote:
> > Enhanced CT Image Storage SOP Class was included in DICOM 2003, but new (2023) CT scanner still only support to export images with legacy (1993) Single-Frame CT Image Storage SOP Class.
> >
> > Why?
> Good question, my best guesses:
> 1) Whatever problems that Enhanced CT were meant to solve lost urgency after 2003 as systems became more powerful (consider commodity hardware going multi-core, or at least HyperThreading), and the entire CT ecosystem which was already built up around 1000 objects / series could handle such series just fine, at modality, PACS, and apps.
> 2) Getting any portion of this ecosystem to change to the newer SOP would present interoperability challenges since some devices would only support old or new, thus the "successful" devices would be stuck having to support both types, probably not the end of the world but does overhead when the old SOP class works just fine, so why bother supporting two?
> 3) As time goes on, the backend does all of the CT processing, so the remote clients don't (and should not) receive this example 1000 object series directly, for the obvious reasons, thus applications would not benefit for using the newer SOP class.
>
> -thanks
I am somewhat surprised also. CT scanners are not using Enhanced multi-frame thought it seems almost every PACS and display product does support Enhanced multi-frame.
-Doug

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:15:36 AM UTC+2, Doug Sluis wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 18, 2023 at 10:49:46 AM UTC-7, Chris O'Donnell wrote:
> > On Friday, April 14, 2023 at 12:08:50 PM UTC-4, gunter zeilinger wrote:
> > > Enhanced CT Image Storage SOP Class was included in DICOM 2003, but new (2023) CT scanner still only support to export images with legacy (1993) Single-Frame CT Image Storage SOP Class.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > Good question, my best guesses:
> > 1) Whatever problems that Enhanced CT were meant to solve lost urgency after 2003 as systems became more powerful (consider commodity hardware going multi-core, or at least HyperThreading), and the entire CT ecosystem which was already built up around 1000 objects / series could handle such series just fine, at modality, PACS, and apps.
> > 2) Getting any portion of this ecosystem to change to the newer SOP would present interoperability challenges since some devices would only support old or new, thus the "successful" devices would be stuck having to support both types, probably not the end of the world but does overhead when the old SOP class works just fine, so why bother supporting two?
> > 3) As time goes on, the backend does all of the CT processing, so the remote clients don't (and should not) receive this example 1000 object series directly, for the obvious reasons, thus applications would not benefit for using the newer SOP class.
> >
> > -thanks
> I am somewhat surprised also. CT scanners are not using Enhanced multi-frame thought it seems almost every PACS and display product does support Enhanced multi-frame.
> -Doug

Only anyone with insight in the decision making process at CT scanner vendors, could tell us why.