Talk:Medical imaging/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merge proposal

Against merging. They are different things to me. Miguel Andrade 14:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Against merging, as per Talk:Radiography. -AED 06:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Against merging, as per Talk:Radiography Philipcosson 19:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

How do we remove this merge suggestion then? 152.105.175.153 08:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

medical imaging service

Is this relevant? It might make a separate page, if rewritten, similar to pages on other occupations, such as biochemist -- which , by the way, is a very weak page and not intended as a model. DGG 04:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I tend to feel it is relevant here, but I have no actual objection to someone splitting it into a separate article. 2*6 11:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Symbol?

Is the image Image:50pman medical imaging.svg an official symbol of any kind? It is presented as such, though I believe this is not the case. A "home-cooked" symbol is not a suitable illustration for "Medical imaging". Arru 13:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

• shouldn't terahertz radiation also be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.78.84.39 (talk) 01:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Images?

Considering the topic, would more medical images from the various technologies be in order? Thanks. 68.113.47.82 19:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded a file into the Wiki Commons under Medical Imaging - and plan on uploading more. I am new to Wikipedia and am unsure how to place the image into the article. We also have several articles regarding the history and current developments in medical infrared imaging that I am working to get released under the GFDL.

On a side note why is it called "digital" medical imaging - that seems redundant since every infrared camera currently used for Medical imaging is digital - the only non digital 35mm cameras that are Near Infrared are used mainly for capturing vegetation and wildlife. MedicalInfrared (talk) 18:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Synchrotron as source for medical imaging

The synchrotron is listed as a source for medical imaging. I do not have references, but I am highly suspicious. While excellent images can be produced by synchrotron beams (and derivatives), these beams would likely be fatal for a live subject. They are, however, used for non-destructive probing fossilized specimens and for other industrial applications.

Does anyone have examples of where imaging using synchrotron beams (or derived sources) for scanning live subjects? I doubt they exist, but also understand that some form of filtered and/or derived beam could have medical applications... Enquire (talk) 21:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

A synchrotron gives different types of radiation. For medical imaging applications it can be seen as a high quality x-ray source. There are a few applications [1], most of them seem to be in research, not day today clinical use - this is because there are not so many synchrotron sources available. It is possible to control amount of x-ray radiation (and the wavelengths) - so it is no more dangerous than normal medical x-ray. Due to better focusing/filtering and often better detectors, radiation doses can be even lower than with conventional x-ray.--Ulrich67 (talk) 19:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

External Links

In response to the notice by Wikipedia about the need to improve the article by "removing excessive or inappropriate external links", I've moved the four listed below to the DICOM article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicom:

• Trial Wire - Free DICOM tool to transfer and anonymize DICOM files....
• MicroDicom - Free DICOM viewer for Windows
• SureVistaVision - Multi-platform DICOM viewer.
• OsiriX - OsiriX Open Source DICOM Viewer

FreedomWorks! (talk) 15:16, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Googled "medical imaging news" and the first site up, although somewhat plain, did have the least amount of flashing ads on it. Thought MedicalIMagingNews.com would make a nice addition. FreedomWorks! (talk) 16:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Snark09 - relevance, notability and COI issues

Klar sagen, why do you insist on having this link here?

• Software to experiment with CT reconstruction algorithms is far too technical for this article in my opinion. The article only briefly mentions reconstruction.
• Even if it is relevant: you can easily do this in MATLAB which is more notable (see WP:N).
• You appear to have a conflict of interest, since your account almost exclusively adds references to SNARK09 and references to a book by G.T. Herman on many articles related to medical imaging. Both SNARK09 and G.T. Herman are affiliated with the Discrete Imaging and Graphics Group of CUNY. I've already submitted this to the COI noticeboard here: Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Klar_sagen. Just in case you missed the COI warning on your talk page that was put there by Sławomir Biały (talk) over a month ago: let me remind you that editing in order to promote an organization you are a member of is prohibited as per WP:COI and can lead to administrative action, especially if done without declaring your affiliation.

As such, this link does not seem appropriate and might be interpreted as Spamdexing. At least for now I am removing it from this article along with the reference to the G.T. Herman book. Please do not add these again until either consensus is reached on this talk page or the above issues are resolved appropriately. Smocking (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Medical Image Automation

Medical Image Automation refers to the capture of visible light medical images from a live video camera feed and their preservation in a patient's electronic medical record (EMR) or Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) with DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine) headers. In the Center for Information Technology Leadership's (CITL) 2007 paper, "The Value of Provider-to-Provider Telehealth Technologies," medical image automation represents Level IV of Advanced Telehealth which is defined as the "convergence of traditional telehealth functionality throughout medicine, including integration with interoperable-EMR systems, such that a distinction between telehealth and traditional medicine becomes meaningless." Rdowney14 (talk) 23:19, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Clouds on the Horizon

Hello, I thought I'd take this opportunity to introduce myself. I'm writing white papers on the migration of medical imaging to cloud based systems. I would like to add some parts of my findings to enhance articles here at Wikipedia. I welcome you adding your insights to this growing trend.--Ourhistory153 (talk) 16:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Use in pharmaceutical clinical trials

Hello, here is a paragraph that I think could be misleading - "Medical imaging has become a major tool in clinical trials since it enables rapid diagnosis..." I just want to mention that many clinical research studies and clinical trials are not designed for patient diagnosis, or they have conditions and consent forms that say that patients would not be contacted and this information would not be disclosed. For example, many research labs are not certified to provide clinical information to patients.[2]. In cases like I mentioned above, patients, however diagnosed, would not be informed.

Radiation exposure about 50%?

The sentence: "Radiation exposure from medical imaging in 2006 made up about 50% of total ionizing radiation exposure in the United States.[3]" seems to incorrectly interpret reference 3. The pie chart in the referenced page has a 48% dose total exposure for medical purposes, which does not equal medical imaging. It would appear that the nuclear medicine part (12%) also includes a part for therapy, although this is not clearly stated. Without nuclear medicine it totals out at 36%, still high, but substantially below 50. All in all, I would think that this reference is not appropriate for making the statement (although the underlying NCRP document probably does contain the correct numbers) and that the numbers are so impressive and worrying so I also would not want to suggest removing the statement. Can someone find a better reference, or can someone subdivide nuclear medicine in imaging and therapy related dose? Or am I wrong in thinking that the field of nuclear medicine includes therapy (in which case all therapeutic doses are missing from the pie chart).

A book review gave the answer, the 48% is actually accurate, as the report specifically ignores therapeutic doses in the nuclear medicine category, see http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncp162 . Shall I add this reference (not open access unfortunately) for clarity?

definition: "non invasive"

Should include "non invasive" in 1st line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.114.121.17 (talk) 12:46, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

3D reconstruction 1st version

The following content was added in these 2 difs by User:Sam93katoch and User:209.147.144.62

3D Reconstruction of Medical Images'

Clinical routine of diagnosis, patient follow-up, computer assisted surgery, surgical planning etc. are facilitated by accurate 3D models of the desired part of human anatomy. Conventional methods like computed tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) have several disadvantages including

• High Irradiation dose in CT.
• Horizontal Alignment of patients which changes the global shape of bone structure evident in diseases related to spine and lower limb.
• Expensive and inappropriate for patients with ferromagnetic metallic implants (MRI).
• High resolution T1-weighted MRI followed by laborious post-processing steps like segmentation can be difficult in many cases if the patient is not properly aligned in the scanner.

Applications:

3D reconstruction system finds its application in a variety of field including

• Medicine
• Film industry
• Robotics
• City planning
• Gaming
• Virtual environment
• Earth observation
• Archaeology
• Augmented reality
• Reverse engineering
• Animation
• Human computer interaction

Existing Approaches:

Delaunay Triangulation(25 Points)

Delaunay and alpha-shapes

• Delaunay method involves extraction of tetrahedron surfaces from initial point cloud. The idea of ‘shape’ for a set of points in space is given by concept of alpha-shapes. Given a finite point set S, and the real parameter alpha, the alpha-shape of S is a polytope (the generalization to any dimension of a two dimensional polygon and a three-dimensional polyhedron) which is neither convex nor necessarily connected . For a large value, the alpha-shape is identical to the convex-hull of S. The algorithm proposed by Edelsbrunner and Mucke eliminates all tetrahedrons which are delimited by a surrounding sphere smaller than α. The surface is then obtained with the external triangles from the resulting tetrahedron.
• Another algorithm called Tight Cocone labels the initial tetrahedrons as interior and exterior. The triangles found in and out generate the resulting surface. Both methods have been recently extended for reconstructing point clouds with noise [3]. In this method the quality of points determines the feasibility of the method. For precise triangulation since we are using the whole point cloud set, the points on the surface with the error above the threshold will be explicitly represented on reconstructed geometry.

Zero Set Methods

Marching Cubes

Reconstruction of the surface is performed using a distance function which assigns to each point in the space a signed distance to the surface S. A contour algorithm is used to extract a zero-set which is used to obtain polygonal representation of the object. Thus, the problem of reconstructing a surface from a disorganized point cloud is reduced to the definition of the appropriate function f with a zero value for the sampled points and different to zero value for the rest. An algorithm called Marching-Cubes established the use of such methods. There are different variants for given algorithm, some use a discrete function f, while other use a polyharmonic radial basis function which is used to adjust the initial point set. Functions like Moving Least Squares, basic functions with local support, based on the Poisson equation have also been used. Loss of the geometry precision in areas with extreme curvature, i.e., corners, edges is one of the main issues encountered. Furthermore, pretreatment of information, by applying some kind of filtering technique, also affects the definition of the corners by softening them. There are several studies related to post-processing techniques used in the reconstruction for the detection and refinement of corners but these methods increase the complexity of the solution.

3D Maximum Intensity Projection

VR Technique

Entire volume transparence of the object is visualized using VR (volume rendering) technique. Images will be formed by projecting rays through volume data. Along each ray, at every voxel, opacity and color needs to be calculated. Then information calculated along each ray will to be aggregated to a pixel on image plane. An entire compact structure of the object can be viewed comprehensively . Since the technique needs enormous amount of calculations, which requires strong configuration computers it is appropriate for low contrast data. Two main methods for rays projecting can be considered as follows:

• Object-order method: Projecting rays go through volume from back to front (from volume to image plane).
• Image-order or ray-casting method: Projecting rays go through volume from front to back (from image plane to volume).There exists some other methods to composite image, appropriate methods depending on the user’s purposes. Some usual methods in medical image are MIP (maximum intensity projection), MinIP (minimum intensity projection), AC (alpha compositing) and NPVR (non-photorealistic volume rendering).

Voxel Grid

High Resolution Intravital Microscopy

In this filtering technique input space is sampled using a grid of 3D voxels to reduce the number of points. For each voxel, a centroid is chosen as the representative of all points. There are two approaches, the selection of the voxel centroid or select the centroid of the points lying within the voxel. To obtain internal points average has a higher computational cost, but offers better results. Thus, a subset of the input space is obtained that roughly represents the underlying surface. The Voxel Grid method presents the same problems as other filtering techniques: impossibility of defining the final number of points that represent the surface, geometric information loss due to the reduction of the points inside a voxel and sensitivity to noisy input spaces. 

References

I removed this with edit note WP:CRYSTALBALL, as this is all research, an not actual medical imaging used clinically, as far as I know (and the sources and content don't make that clear). It is also too WP:TECHNICAL. It also given a lot of space, which seems WP:UNDUE to me.

Additionally... the introduction contrasts this to MRI and CT but doesn't make clear what kind of actual acquisition technology is used; no acquisition technology is perfect. So what generates the data used here?

The sources are also old, and primary, not secondary. (see WP:MEDDEF). A bunch of this also cites no sources at all.

So those are six issues CRYSTALBALL, TECHNICAL, UNDUE, missing information to provide context, and sourcing or lack thereof. Jytdog (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

3D reconstruction 2nd version

Content was then re-added by User:Ksaikeerthy in these diffs:

Projection of P on both cameras

3D reconstruction of medical images

Motivation & applications

The 2-D imaging has problems of anatomy overlapping with each other and don’t disclose the abnormalities. The 3-D imaging can be used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.

3-D models are used for planning the operation, morphometric studies and has more reliability in orthopedics.

Problem statement & Basics

To reconstruct 3-D images from 2-D images taken by a camera at multiple angles.

Lateral view of the bone

Medical imaging techniques like CT scan and MRI are expensive. Though CT scan is accurate, it induces high radiation dose which is a risk for patients with certain diseases. Methods based on MRI are not accurate. Since we are exposed to powerful magnetic field, this method is not suitable for patients with ferromagnetic metallic implants. Both the methods can be done only when in lying position where the global structure of the bone changes. So, we discuss the following methods which can be performed while standing and require low radiation dose.

Though these techniques are 3-D imaging, the region of interest is restricted to a slice, data is acquired to form a time sequence. 

1) Stereo Corresponding Point Based Technique

This method is simple and implemented by identifying the points manually in multi-view radiographs. The first step is to extract the corresponding points in two x-ray images and second step is the 3D reconstruction with algorithms like Discrete Linear Transform . Using DLT, the reconstruction is done only where there are SCP’s. By increasing the number of points , the results improve but it is time consuming. This method has low accuracy because of low reproducibility and time consumption. This method is dependent on the skill of the operator. This method is not suitable for bony structures with continuous shape. This method is generally used as intial solution for other methods.

anterier view of the bone

2) Non-Stereo corresponding contour method(NCSS)

This method uses X-ray images for 3D Reconstruction and to develop 3D models with low dose radiations in weight bearing positions.

In NSCC algorithm, the preliminary step is calculation of an initial solution. Firstly anatomical regions from the generic object are defined. Secondly, manual 2D contours identification on the radiographs is performed. From each radiograph 2D contours are generated using the 3D initial solution object. 3D contours of the initial object surface are projected onto their associated radiograph . The 2D association performed between these 2 set points is based on point-to-point distances and contours derivations developing a correspondence between the 2D contours and the 3D contours. Next step is optimization of the initial solution. Lastly deformation of the optimized solution is done by applying Kriging algorithm to the optimized solution . Finally, by iterating the final step until the distance between two set points is superior to a given precision value the reconstructed object is obtained. 

The advantage of this method is they can be used for bony structures with continuous shape and it also reduced human intervention but they are time consuming.

posterier view of the bone

3) Surface Rendering technique 

Surface Rendering technique visualizes a 3D object as a set of surfaces called iso-surfaces. Each surface has points with same intensity (called iso-value). It is used when we want to see the separated structures e.g. skull from slices of head, blood vessel system from slices of body etc. This technique is used mostly for high contrast data. Two main methods for reconstructing are:

- Contour based reconstruction: Iso-contours are attached to form iso-surfaces .

- Voxel based reconstruction: Voxels having same intensity values are used to form iso-surfaces. One of the best algorithms is Marching Cubes . Some similar algorithms as Marching Tetrahedrons, Deviding Cubes can be considered.

Other methods which can be used for 3d reconstruction are

Other proposed or developed techniques include Statistical Shape Model Based Methods, Parametric Methods, Hybrid methods.

References

This is shorter than the first version, so less of an issue with UNDUE, but all the other issues mentioned above are still present.

Also are you all in a class or something? Please explain what is going on. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys,

This is my first time to edit a wiki page. Yes, this was a course assignment. So we are waiting for a feedback from our professor. As soon as I get that I will make the necessary changes. And I also read your viewpoints on the topic and hence will research over the matter more so as to improve it. (Sam93katoch (talk) 04:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC))

Moreover since our course assignment included that we have to write the approaches on which research is going on, thats why I included those methods. But I will try to cite better publications for the same.(Sam93katoch (talk) 04:25, 16 November 2016 (UTC))

Thanks for replying!! Before you take a second shot, please do review the training materials at the links that I left on your talk page. Content in Wikipedia needs to be comply with the policies and guidelines that the community put in place over the years - there is a learning curve. Not impossible, but there is stuff you have to be grounded on. Jytdog (talk) 04:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Medical imaging. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130609063515/http://www.pedrad.org/associations/5364/ig/?page=365 to http://www.pedrad.org/associations/5364/ig/?page=365

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:30, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Medical imaging. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130814105551/http://www.snm.org/ to http://www.snm.org/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://rad.usuhs.edu/medpix/parent.php3?mode=home_page
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150213002852/http://www.siliconmentor.com/biomedical-imaging-signal-analysis/ to http://www.siliconmentor.com/biomedical-imaging-signal-analysis/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

Kindly add the below as a reference* here "Radiography-->Projectional radiographs, more commonly known as x-rays, are often used to determine the type and extent of a fracture[*]" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20172792 --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hidasri (talk • contribs) 22:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

That is a pretty old primary source, and we don't use them. Please see WP:MEDRS. Thanks for the suggestion tho! Jytdog (talk) 03:57, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

3rd Reference gives a 404

Hi everyone, the link in the 3rd reference gives a 404. Should be changed/deleted.

The 3rd reference at the moment is: "Medical Imaging Chip Global Unit Volume To Soar Over the Next Five Years". Silicon Semiconductor. 8 September 2016. Retrieved 25 October 2019.

Best regards Sterafix (talk) 14:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 October 2019 and 19 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alyshaanders1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Medical instrumentation

In my personal wiki, I cut the Gordian knot by creating a page titled medical instrumentation as a subtopic of medical device (presently conflated). This runs parallel to medical imaging but deals with things like electrograms, which are not precisely images.

The paragraph here which coughs and stutters about how electrograms might be considered images, sort of sometimes, is darn awkward to my eye.

I'm not sure my own solution is perfect, but it's better than this. — MaxEnt 00:28, 20 February 2023 (UTC)