European Radiology

, Volume 16, Issue 12, pp 2775–2791 | Cite as

Enterprise imaging and multi-departmental PACS

  • Björn BerghEmail author
Computer Applications


The aim of this review is to present the status of digital image acquisition and archiving outside of radiology and to describe the technical concepts and possibilities of how a “radiology” Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS) can become a multi-departmental (MD-)PACS. First the principles of system integration technology are explained and illustrated by the description of a typical radiology system integration. Then four types of modality integration approaches are defined: the direct modality integration (Type-I), the integration via DICOM acquisition software (Type-II) the integration via specialised systems either with (Type-III) or without PACS connection (Type-IV). The last section is dedicated to the presentation of the PACS requirements of selected interdisciplinary modality types [Endoscopy, Ultrasound and Electrocardiography (ECG)] and clinical disciplines (Pathology, Dermatology, Ophthalmology and Cardiology), which are then compared with the technical possibilities of a MD-PACS.


PACS Multi-departmental Image distribution Electronic patient record Hospital information system Archiving 



I want to thank Peter Reimer (Klinikum Karlsruhe) who had the idea for this review, Martina Hutter and Antje Hollerbach for their support in the manuscript production and literature search as well as Jürgen Zapf (GE, Dornstadt) and Marco Eichelberg (Offis, Oldenburg) for complementary technical information.


  1. 1.
    Boehm T, Handgraetinger O, Link J, Ploner R, Voellmy DR, Marincek B, Wildermuth S (2004) Evaluation of radiological workstations and web-browser-based image distribution clients for a PACS project in hands-on workshops. Eur Radiol 14(5):908–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergh B, Pietsch M, Schlaefke A, Garcia I, Vogl TJ (2004) Upload capacity and time-to-display of an image web system during simultaneous up- and download processes. Eur Radiol 14(3):526–533PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergh B, Pietsch M, Schlaefke A, Vogl TJ (2003) Performance of web-based image distribution: client-oriented measurements. Eur Radiol 3(9):2161–2169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kotter E, Langer M (1998) Integrating HIS-RIS-PACS: the Freiburg experience. Eur Radiol 8(9):1707–1718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bick U, Lenzen H (1999) PACS: the silent revolution. Eur Radiol 9(6):1152–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Creighton C (1999) A literature review on communication between picture archiving and communication systems and radiology information systems and/or hospital information systems. J Digit Imaging 12(3):138–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levine BA, Mun SK, Benson HR, Horii SC (2003) Assessment of the Integration of a HIS/RIS with a PACS. J Digit Imaging 133–140Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ratib O, Swiernik M, McCoy JM (2003) From PACS to integrated EMR. Comput Med Imaging Graph 27(2–3):207–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boochever SS (2004) HIS/RIS/PACS integration: getting to the gold standard. Radiol Manage 26(3):16–24; quiz 25–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dayhoff RE, Kuzmak PM, Kirin G, Frank S (1999) Providing a complete online multimedia patient record. Proc AMIA Symp: 241–245Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ondo K (2004) PACS direct experiences: implementation, selection, benefits realized. J Digit Imaging 17(4):249–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Mildenberger P, Eichelberg M, Martin E (2002) Introduction to the DICOM standard. Eur Radiol 12(4):920–927PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Siegel EL, Channin DS (2001) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: a primer. Part 1. Introduction. Radiographics 21(5):1339–1341PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Channin DS (2001) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: a primer. Part 2. Seven brides for seven brothers: the IHE integration profiles. Radiographics 21(5):1343–1350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Channin DS, Parisot C, Wanchoo V, Leontiev A, Siegel EL (2001) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: a primer: Part 3. What does IHE do for ME? Radiographics 21(5):1351–1358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Henderson M, Behlen FM, Parisot C, Siegel EL, Channin DS (2001) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: a primer. Part 4. The role of existing standards in IHE. Radiographics 21(6):1597–1603PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Channin DS (2002) Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise: a primer. Part 6: the fellowship of IHE: year 4 additions and extensions. Radiographics 22(6):1555–1560PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wein B (2003) [IHE (Integrating the Healthcare Enterprise): a new approach for the improvement of digital communication in healthcare] Rofo 175(2):183–186PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DICOM Standard Supplement 57: Revised Secondary Capture Objects.
  22. 22.
    Hussein R, Engelmann U, Schroeter A, Meinzer HP (2004) DICOM structured reporting: Part 1. Overview and characteristics. Radiographics 24(3):891–896PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Csipo D, Dayhoff RE, Kuzmak PM (2001) Integrating Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM)-structured reporting into the hospital environment. J Digit Imaging 14(2 Suppl 1):12–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    DICOM Standard Supplement 85: Web Access to DICOM Objects (WADO).
  26. 26.
    Johnson D, Johnson M (2004) Digital video. Clin Orthop 421:17–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    DICOM Standard Supplement 104: DICOM Encapsulation of PDF Documents.
  28. 28.
    Indman P (1995) Documentation in endoscopy. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 22(3):605–616PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Berci G, Paz-Partlow M (1988) Electronic imaging in endoscopy. Surg Endosc 2:227–233PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Berci G, Schwaitzberg SD (2002) The importance of understanding the basics of imaging in the era of high-tech endoscopy: part I. Logic, reality, and utopia. Surg Endosc 16:377–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Berci G, Schwaitzberg SD (2002) The importance of understanding the basics of imaging in the era of high-tech endoscopy: part II. Logic, reality, and utopia. Surg Endosc 16(11):1518–1522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Melder PC, Mair EA (2003) Endoscopic photography: digital or 35 mm? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 129(5):570–575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Troy A, Holdoway A, Tolley D (2002) Endoscopic data acquisition and storage. Curr Opin Urol 12(2):161–163PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bruno D, Delvecchio FC, Preminger GM (1999) Digital still image recording during video endoscopy. J Endourol 13(5):353–356; discussion 356–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hernandez-Zendejas G, Dobke MK, Guerrerosantos J (2004) The universal serial bus endoscope: design and initial clinical experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg 28(3):181–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nelson DB, Block KP, Bosco JJ, Burdick JS, Curtis WD, Faigel DO, Greenwald DA, Kelsey PB, Rajan E, Slivka A, Smith P, Wassef W, VanDam J, Wang KK, Barthel J, Affronti JP, Aliperti G, Etemad B, Kocab MA, Kozam ML, Rosen AM, Silverstein BD, Vakil N (2000) Technology status evaluation report: computerized endoscopic medical record systems: November 1999. Gastrointest Endosc 51(6):793–796PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Delvaux MM, Crespi M, Armengol-Miro JR, Hagenmuller F, Teuffel W (1999) The GASTER project: building a computer network in digestive endoscopy: the experience of the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol 29(2):118–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    James DA, Rowlands D, Mahnovetski R, Channells J, Cutmore T (2003) Internet based ECG medical information system. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 26(1):25–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zong W, Wang P, Leung B, Moody GB, Mark RG (2002) An automated, web-enabled and searchable database system for archiving electrogram and related data from implantable cardioverter defibrillators. Comput Cardiol 29:269–272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Riley RS, Ben-Ezra JM, Massey D, Slyter RL, Romagnoli G (2004) Digital photography: a primer for pathologists. J Clin Lab Anal 18(2):91–128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Leong FJ, Leong AS (2004) Digital photography in anatomical pathology. J Postgrad Med 50(1):62–69PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Belanger AJ, Lopes AE, Sinard JH (2000) Implementation of a practical digital imaging system for routine gross photography in an autopsy environment. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124(1):160–165PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Park RW, Eom JH, Byun HY, Park P, Lee KB, Joo HJ (2003) Automation of gross photography using a remote-controlled digital camera system. Arch Pathol Lab Med 127(6):726–731PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kalinski T, Hofmann H, Franke DS, Roessner A (2002) Digital imaging and electronic patient records in pathology using an integrated department information system with PACS. Pathol Res Pract 198(10):679–684PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Marchevsky AM, Dulbandzhyan R, Seely K, Carey S, Duncan RG (2002) Storage and distribution of pathology digital images using integrated web-based viewing systems. Arch Pathol Lab Med 126(5):533–539PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Catalyurek U, Beynon MD, Chang C, Kurc T, Sussman A, Saltz J (2003) The virtual microscope. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 7(4):230–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Weinstein RS, Descour MR, Liang C, Barker G, Scott KM, Richter L, Krupinski EA, Bhattacharyya AK, Davis JR, Graham AR, Rennels M, Russum WC, Goodall JF, Zhou P, Olszak AG, Williams BH, Wyant JC, Bartels PH (2004) An array microscope for ultrarapid virtual slide processing and telepathology. Design, fabrication, and validation study. Hum Pathol 35(11):1303–1314PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Costello SS, Johnston DJ, Dervan PA, O’Shea DG (2003) Development and evaluation of the virtual pathology slide: a new tool in telepathology. J Med Internet Res 5(2):e11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Strauss RM, Goodfield MJ (2003) Digital imaging in clinical dermatology across the UK in the year 2001. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 17(3):285–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Scheinfeld NS, Flanigan K, Moshiyakhov M, Weinberg JM (2003) Trends in the use of cameras and computer technology among dermatologists in New York City 2001–2002. Dermatol Surg 29(8):822–825; discussion 826PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Papier A, Peres MR, Bobrow M, Bhatia A (2000) The digital imaging system and dermatology. Int J Dermatol 39(8):561–575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Ratner D, Thomas CO, Bickers D (1999) The uses of digital photography in dermatology. J Am Acad Dermatol 41(5 Pt 1):749–756PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fogelberg A, Ioffreda M, Helm KF (2004) The utility of digital clinical photographs in dermatopathology. J Cutan Med Surg 8(2):116–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kuchenbecker J, Behrens-Baumann W (2004) Use of an electronic patient record system at the Department of Ophthalmology, Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg. Ophthalmologe 101(12):1214–1219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lamminen H (2003) Picture archiving and fundus imaging in a glaucoma clinic. J Telemed Telecare 9(2):114–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Torok B, Bischoff P (2002) [The St. Gallen digital ophthalmological imaging system.] Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 219(4):306–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    DICOM Standard Supplement 91: Ophthalmic Photography SOP Classes.
  58. 58.
    Nissen SE (1996) Evolution of the filmless cardiac angiography suite: promise and perils of the evolving digital era. Am J Cardiol 78(3A):41–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Weterings RA (1998) Integrated image storage solution for the Cath department. Int J Card Imaging 14(5):349–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Thomas JD (1998) The DICOM image formatting standard: its role in echocardiography and angiography. Int J Card Imaging 14(Suppl 1):1–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Girard T, Filipovic M (2004) From the echocardiography machine to the lecture room: a simple method for transferring echocardiographic frames and loops to a personal computer. Anesth Analg 98(3):703–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hansen WH, Gilman G, Finnesgard SJ, Wellik TJ, Nelson TA, Johnson MF, Schwenk NM, Seward JB, Khandheria BK (2004) The transition from an analog to a digital echocardiography laboratory: the Mayo experience. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 17(11):1214–1224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sable C (2002) Digital echocardiography and telemedicine applications in pediatric cardiology. Pediatr Cardiol 23(3):358–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Thomas JD, Greenberg NL, Garcia MJ (2002) Digital echocardiography 2002: now is the time. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 15(8):831–838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ehler D, Vacek JL, Bansal S, Gowda M, Powers KB (2000) Transition to an all-digital echocardiography laboratory: a large, multi-site private cardiology practice experience. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 13(12):1109–1116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Treitl M, Wirth S, Lucke A, Villain S, Rieger J, Pfeifer KJ, Reiser M (2005) IT services in a completely digitized radiological department: value and benefit of an in-house departmental IT group. Eur Radiol 15(7):1485–1492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pohjonen H, Kauppinen T, Ahovuo J (2004) ASP archiving solution of regional HUSpacs. Eur Radiol 14(9):1702–1706PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Director of Information Technology and Medical EngineeringUniversitätsklinikum HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations