CompuServe Thread

#MRI images

18 messages in this thread
#35445From: Charles ReedJun 20, 1993 12:47 AM
I've recently had a set of 84 MRI images made of my head. I would like to know if it is feasible to obtain the digital data (I've been told it's stored on a WORM optical drive) in a form that can be stored and interpreted by my computer. I have an Amiga 2000HD with a Quantum 40 MB hard drive and a removable-media SyQuest drive that uses 88MB Winchester cartridges. I would like to be able to display and image-process the data on my computer as well as be able to provide it to another MRI facility, should the need arise. What type of image formats and/or conversion programs could help me do this at a reasonable price? If the amount of data is in the megabyte range, I should be able to store it all somehow. –Charles Reed [72247,2161]
#35460From: Jim SteeleJun 20, 1993 8:42 PM
Charles, you should ask Black Belt Systems over in AmigaVendor. I think they have a MRI loader for Imagemaster. Jim
#35479From: Black Belt SystemsJun 21, 1993 3:59 PM
Charles, Imagemaster can load GE MRI image files, in either Intel or MOT formats; both are common. MRI images are *generally* 256×256 arrays of 8 bit or deeper data; that means about 64k bytes of space per image, uncompressed. Imagemaster R/t, due shortly, contains a new saving technology that will obtain maximum compression for the files, MUCH higher than IFF ILBM can do, and still remain lossless. If you have 84 images, you're looking at about 5.5 megs of raw data in 8 bit, or 11 megs of raw data in 16 bits. Odds are the files would take up about a megabyte if converted to the new format (called TRIM) in Imagemaster R/t. In the mean time, IM cna load and process the images if you can get them in GE MRI format. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#35527From: Charles ReedJun 23, 1993 11:07 PM
Your calculations about raw image size are pretty close to mine. I think that I would like to know how much ImageMaster costs. I am now having a RIDICULOUS problem, however. Today I signed out the analog b&w images from the center that made them, but GE refuses to release the digital data to me! So I am in the odd position of being in possession of the original films but they are refusing to release the digital images to me in ANY form unless my doctor requests it. My doctor said "no" and GE is afraid of losing confidentiality, even though all they have to do is copy my data (already released to me in analog form) and send me the copy on a tape or via some other means equally satisfactory to us both. Indeed THEY refused to tell me even the SIZE of my file OR the size a single raw digital image! know my doctor has no interest in digital imagery and is technically ignorant of the uses to which digital imagery can be put. Tomorrow I try again to convince him to ask for the data, but I may have to force legal action to get results. I should own the data, but should GE be forced to produce it, I could get it in a form that is useless to me: a 1.2 gigabyte DAT tape containing my 5.5MB file! Any suggestions? –Charles Reed
#35528From: SyndesisJun 23, 1993 11:38 PM
You could always scan the films. I doubt you really "own" the data. It's your head, but not your machine, and the hospital doesn't have to release everything to you in a form you want. You don't really want all that data, do you? An Exabyte 8mm tape holds 5 gig. If you scanned the films on a flatbed scanner, you'd get much more manageable amounts of data.
#35536From: Charles ReedJun 24, 1993 8:56 AM
John, This thought had occurred to me, however, the TOTAL amount of MY data is only about 5.5 MB uncompressed! I don't need gigabytes of data, nor is that much part of my record. The images are only 256 x 256 pixels with 256 gray levels, but the analog films contain multiple images and each film is about the size of a standard hospital X-Ray. I may need to fall back on scanning, but the highest accuracy should come from the original digital data made with the highest-quality equipment. That should be the starting point before any additional image processing on my part begins, but I may eventually need to fall back on scanning the films. The DUMB part is that they readily released ALL the analog data to me, but won't even talk to me about releasing the digital part in ANY form at this point in time, even though all they would be issuing is a digital COPY. –Charles Reed
#35541From: SyndesisJun 24, 1993 10:37 AM
I'm sorry, I thought you said 5.5 gig. 🙂 Never mind. Have you considered the possibility that they're simply stalling because they've erased your data already? It's undoubtably a hassle for them. Are you willing to pay hourly charges to ask them to do it?
#35608From: Charles ReedJun 27, 1993 1:59 AM
That depends on the rates and the estimated time to complete the task. They have stated that the data is stored on a WORM optical disk, so I don't think it's been destroyed. I learned from a friend of mine at the corporation for which I worked that a read of 5.5 MB and save to a 1.3 GB tape would take about 5 minutes and that a blank tape of this type would cost about $5.00. They are supposed to be using a Sun workstation and Unix, so such an operation would be simple. BUT, I'd still need to find a way to read the data off such a tape. They are now claiming that they have no tape drives available at their facility, though one technician let slip that apparently their facility IS tied to other GE facilities through a proprietary Ethernet network. I have NO idea how long it would take to transfer 5.5 MB across the network to the nearest node with a tape drive. I've been trying to determine the technical feasibility so that I could come up with a reasonable estimate for cost, but they are now refusing to even discuss technical problems with me. –Charles Reed
#35612From: Robert HayesJun 27, 1993 8:42 AM
5.5 meg would take maybe two minutes over an Ethernet network under normal load.
#35621From: Marlene Zenker/SYSOPJun 27, 1993 4:33 PM
> 5.5 meg would take maybe two minutes over an Ethernet network under > normal load. Depends on the machines involved…I do that kind of transfer regularly, and it takes 40 seconds or less…and that's on a pretty heavily loaded network. Steve
#35642From: Robert HayesJun 29, 1993 6:47 AM
I wanted to give him a worst-case scenario…
#35652From: Charles ReedJun 30, 1993 1:20 AM
Thanks. That's just about in the range I thought it would be!
#35564From: Rob SalmonJun 24, 1993 11:22 PM
Are you near a teaching hospital? One with a radiology residency program? If so, you could probably talk the nuc. med. techs into scanning the film for you if you offer them a copy. The DuPont F-Series scanners (which handle up to 14×17 film) give you a good 256 gray scale image as well as a positive print of the film if you want that also.
#35609From: Charles ReedJun 27, 1993 2:09 AM
I am probably near two such facilities, but I'm not that familiar with their programs. Also, time is a factor. I currently live in Denver, CO but I am forced to leave in July for St. Louis. My best guess is that Boulder, CO has such a program and the technology to go with it, but Denver University might also be such a possibility. In St. Louis, Washington University is a hotbed of MRI research activity. I would like to definitively rule out the possibility of obtaining the original digital data first, however. It seems to me that the technical difficulties might not be insuperable, but the cost might be prohibitive. This would be relatively straightforward if the facility would be "straight" with me about their capabilities and help by providing an estimate of cost, but they talked to their lawyers instead and have grown skittish, apparently afraid I'm going to institute a malpractice suit or something. –Charles Reed
#35627From: Rob SalmonJun 27, 1993 10:31 PM
I'm not sure I can help you. Barnes, which now has a hyphenated name because of a merger, is a good teaching hospital in St. Louis and I know they have teleradiology, which means digital images. One suggestion, avoid lawyers and doctors; try to talk to the physicists or the technicians on a collegial basis. If you can get their interest, they'll do it free.
#35651From: Charles ReedJun 30, 1993 1:18 AM
Yep, that sounds like the best course to me as well. Now, how to implement this idea practicall … hmmm.
#35530From: Black Belt SystemsJun 24, 1993 12:29 AM
Urg. First suggestion is to take the films and have them scanned using a 256-grey level transparency equipped scanner. That's the easy way out, not fighting the large entrenched company. The next path is "call a lawyer" (I can't beleive I sad that… gak) and have the lawyer call GE. That should be relatively inexpensive. Imagemaster is $199.95; Imagemaster R/t, due shortly, is $299.95; either one can be had for $99.95 direct from us if you can come up with a front page of a manual from either any ASDG software imaging product (AdPro vX, Morph+, ProScanLab) or any GVP Imaging product (Cinemorph, ImageFX). For more info, you can always call (800) 852-6442. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#35537From: Charles ReedJun 24, 1993 9:03 AM
Ben, Thanks for the info. I agree that the first method would work, but I personally do not have a scanner and am currently an unemployed aerospace engineer, thinking about going back to graduate school. Of course, it could STILL be true that the first option would be cheaper and faster than the second one (see a lawyer), but we all know that the original digital data should be of the best quality, by not being "filtered" first through an analog process. This is the REAL reason I'm interested in obtaining the copy of the original digital data. –Charles Reed