Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 24, Issue 5, pp 848–856 | Cite as

Dicoogle - an Open Source Peer-to-Peer PACS

  • Carlos CostaEmail author
  • Carlos Ferreira
  • Luís Bastião
  • Luís Ribeiro
  • Augusto Silva
  • José Luís Oliveira


Picture Archiving and Communication Systems (PACS) have been widely deployed in healthcare institutions, and they now constitute a normal commodity for practitioners. However, its installation, maintenance, and utilization are still a burden due to their heavy structures, typically supported by centralized computational solutions. In this paper, we present Dicoogle, a PACS archive supported by a document-based indexing system and by peer-to-peer (P2P) protocols. Replacing the traditional database storage (RDBMS) by a documental organization permits gathering and indexing data from file-based repositories, which allows searching the archive through free text queries. As a direct result of this strategy, more information can be extracted from medical imaging repositories, which clearly increases flexibility when compared with current query and retrieval DICOM services. The inclusion of P2P features allows PACS internetworking without the need for a central management framework. Moreover, Dicoogle is easy to install, manage, and use, and it maintains full interoperability with standard DICOM services.


PACS Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) Medical imaging Peer-to-peer Computer communication networks Open source PACS implementation Information storage and retrieval 



The research leading to these results has received funding from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT) under grant agreement PTDC/EIA-EIA/104428/2008.


  1. 1.
    Costa C, Silva A, Oliveira JL: Current perspectives on PACS and cardiology case study. In: Vaidya S, Jain LC, Yoshida H Eds. Studies in Computational Intelligence: Advanced Computational Intelligence Paradigms in Healthcare. Berlin: Springer, p. capt. 5, 2007, pp 79–108Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huang HK: PACS and Imaging Informatics: Basic Principles and Applications. New York: Wiley, 2004Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oosterwijk H: Dicom Basics, third edition. OTech, Aubrey, 2005Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    DICOM-P4: Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM), Part 4: Service Class Specifications, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2009Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pianykh OS, H.M.S., Boston MA: USA Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM)—A Practical Introduction and Survival Guide. Berlin: Springer, 2008Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    DICOM-P18: Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM), Part 18: Web Access to DICOM Persistent Objects (WADO), National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2009Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Warren-Forward H, et al: An assessment of exposure indices in computed radiography for the posterior–anterior chest and the lateral lumbar spine. Br J Radiol 80(949):26–31, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kallman HE, et al: DICOM metadata repository for technical information in digital medical images. Acta Oncol 48(2):285–8, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vano E, et al: Paediatric entrance doses from exposure index in computed radiography. Phys Med Biol 53(12):3365–3380, 2008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reiner BI, et al: Multi-institutional analysis of computed and direct radiography—part II. Economic analysis. Radiology 236:420–426, 2005PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Polónia DF, et al: Inequality problems in the distribution of radiologists in Portugal: requirements for the creation of an imaging marketplace. In eChallenges, Istanbul—Turkey, 2009Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Costa C, et al: Indexing and retrieving DICOM data in disperse and unstructured archives. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 4(1):71–77, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Apache SF: Lucene Index Server—, 2010
  14. 14.
    McCandless M, Hatcher E, Gospodnetic O: Lucene in Action, second edition, Greenwich: Manning, 2010Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    dcm4che. sourceforge project:, 2007
  16. 16.
    Warnock MJ, et al: Benefits of Using the DCM4CHE DICOM Archive. Journal of Digital Imaging—Springer New York, 20—Supplement 1: pp 125–129, 2007Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    DICOM-P3: Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM), Part 3: Information Object Definitions, National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2009Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    SUN JAI ImageIO Project,
  19. 19.
    Fiaidhi J, Orabi M, Mohammed S: Sharing DICOM learning objects within a mobile peer-to-peer podacasting environment. Int J Mob Commun 6(4):417–435, 2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Maglogiannis I, Constantinos D, Kazatzopoulos L: Enabling collaborative medical diagnosis over the Internet via peer-to-peer distribution of electronic health records. J Med Syst 30(2):107–116, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Blanquer I, Hernadez V, Mas F: A peer-to-peer environment to share medical images and diagnoses providing context-based searching. In Proceedings of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-Based Processing. IEEE Computer Society, 2005Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pan TC, et al: Informatics in radiology: GridCAD: grid-based computer-aided detection system. Radiographics 27(3):889–897, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blanquer I, Hernandez V, Segrelles D: TRENCADIS—A Grid Architecture for Creating Virtual Repositories of DICOM Objects in an OGSA-Based Ontological Framework in Biological and Medical Data Analysis—Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 2006, pp 183–194Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Michal V, et al: A Reliable DICOM Transfer Grid Service Based on Petri Net Workflows. Proceedings of the 2008 Eighth IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID)—Volume 00, IEEE Computer Society, 2008Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stephanos A-T, Diomidis S: A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies. ACM Comput Surv 36(4):335–371, 2004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Madhukar A. Williamson C: A Longitudinal Study of P2P Traffic Classification. Modeling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems, 2006. MASCOTS 2006. 14th IEEE International Symposium, 2006Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Naimul B, et al: A comparative analysis of web and peer-to-peer traffic. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web. Beijing: ACM, 2008Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    JGroups P, JGroups—A Toolkit for Reliable Multicast Communication. 2010; available from:
  29. 29.
    Traversat B, et al: Project JXTA 2.0 Super-Peer Virtual Network, Project JXTA—Sun Microsystems, Inc., 2003Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Saint-Andre, E: RFC3920—Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Core, IETF, 2004Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Costa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Carlos Ferreira
    • 1
  • Luís Bastião
    • 1
  • Luís Ribeiro
    • 1
  • Augusto Silva
    • 1
  • José Luís Oliveira
    • 1
  1. 1.DETI/IEETAUniversity of AveiroAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations