NetForum uses cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use the site, we'll assume that you are happy to receive these cookies on the NetForum website. Read about our cookies.
NetForum Community
Learn. Share. Optimize.
Log in | Sign up now | Submit content | Contact
Go to similar content

Evaluation of enterprise-wide, thin-client collaboration between radiology and oncology on imaging evaluation of treatment response

Abstract
Philips CT Clinical Science Philips Healthcare • USA

Mullinix J, Rankin J, Stoner C, Dharaiya E, Yanof J.

Conclusion 
Maximizing workflow efficiency in radiology and collaborating departments is of great importance. Measureable workflow improvements can be achieved with enterprise-wide thin-client/server solutions including advanced processing and reporting capabilities.

Background
Collaborating on image response evaluation spans departments (radiology, oncology), imaging modalities, PACS, and thin client/server solutions. We reviewed advanced post-processing applications and networking features that can increase interdepartmental efficiency in treatment response evaluation:
  1. sending baseline and follow-up images to a server
  2. preparing for longitudinal tumor measurements
  3. performing measurements (e.g.,diameter)
  4. calculating response criteria for categorization. 
Evaluation
We evaluated workflow efficiency by estimating time savings (per data set) with the Multi-modality Tumor Tracking Application (MMTT) of the IntelliSpace Portal (ISP, Philips Healthcare) relative to alternate methods: Sending images to server: Protocols set-up to automatically send image data to the ISP server saved between 5-10 minutes in comparison with PACS retrieval. Preparing for measurements: After lesion selection and identification in the baseline study, the MMTT application's advanced tools for automatic registration of multiple data sets prior to temporal comparison saved between 7-12 minutes. Performing measurements: Use of semi-automated MMTT tools to measure follow-up lesions saved about 4-12 minutes relative to PACS. Calculating and reporting response criteria: The evaluation criteria, e.g., RECIST 1.1, is automatically calculated. Alternate methods using a spreadsheet are more time consuming and prone to error. The oncology staff and the study monitor can access results via bookmarks and reports placed by the radiologist on the ISP client.

Discussion
The major time savings resulted from automatic registration of longitudinal datasets, response criteria calculation, and reporting via the thin-client review. Features such as automatic image sending and customizable analysis workflow were also of significance. These features and tools facilitate collaboration as the image data is processed toward shared quantitative results.


This content has been made possible by NetForum Community.
Share this on: Share your link in twitter Share your link in facebook Share your link on LinkedIn Print Rate this article: Log in to vote

 
Rating:
Votes:
2
Views:
4105
Added:
Jan 22, 2013

Rate this:
Log in to vote
 

Abstract
IntelliSpace Portal
Body, follow up, lesion, Multi-modality Tumor Tracking, Oncology, post processing software, quantitative, reporting, workflow
 

Clinical News
Best Practices
Case Studies
Publications and Abstracts
White Papers
Web seminars and Presentations
ExamCards
Protocols
Application Tips and FAQ
Training
Try an Application
Business News
Case Studies
White Papers
Web Seminars and Presentations
Utilization Services
Contributing Professionals
Contributing Institutions
Become a Contributor