Translation:

Hello! Is it possible to somehow add MIP mode viewing not only in 3D MPR mode?
In routine work, the MIP mode (usually 8-14 mm) is used to conveniently find nodules in the lungs. It would be very convenient if this mode could be turned on without going into MPR3D - it takes a lot of time. I think many radiologists would say thank you very much for this opportunity (enable MIP mode, for example, 10mm thick in the main window and not only in MPR3d). You can even restrict yourself to some axial slices and one selected MIP thickness - the main thing is to quickly turn on this mode without opening MPR3D.
Also, if technically possible, it would be very convenient to enable the AVERAGE mode in 3mm in the main window by pressing one button. (to reduce noise).

Original:

Здравствуйте! А возможно ли как то добавить просмотр режима MIP не только в режиме 3D MPR?
В рутинной работе для удобного поиска узелков в легких используется режим MIP (обычно 8-14 мм). Было бы очень удобно, если бы этот режим можно было включать не заходя в MPR3D - на это тратится довольно много времени. Думаю многие радиологи сказали бы огромное спасибо за такую возможность (включить режим MIP толщиной, например, 10мм в главном окне а не только в MPR3d). Можно даже ограничиться одними аксиальными срезами и одной выбранной толщиной MIPа - главное быстрое включение этого режима без открытия MPR3D.
Также, если это технически возможно, было бы очень удобно включать AVERAGE режим в 3мм в главном окне нажатием одной кнопки. (для уменьшения шума).


Please, enable MIP 10 mm in main window (not only in MPR3D). I think a lot of radiologist's will be happy to have this option in main window.

Hi,

Currently it's only possible to use MIP in the 3D MPR mode.
On modern PCs switching into 3D MPR takes a fraction of second. When using keyboard shortcuts the whole process takes not more than two seconds (F2, TAB, Enter, F2, F3). Of course having this option in the 2D viewer would be convenient, we agree. We've added your request to our to-do list.

That's really complex problem if You think about it.

Currently standard Radiant 2D viewer takes a single DICOM file in a viewfield process it (zoom, pan, filters window, overlays), and renders it, if You scroll up/down it just changes the input and renders it once again.

3D MPR makes a model, processing a series of DICOM files into one big pile of data, and lets You get the most of it, independant of other windows/dicom sets - and MIP processing is a "many input" case.

If I could design Radiant by myself (I'm perfectly aware that it would break the incredible speed of Radiant) I'd integrate the entire 3D feature set into main window, opening a thread per viewport.
It would make Radiant epic and suitable for professional (yet not as lightweight as it is now). Current approach used is the same as in Osirix, designed yeaaars ago.
Radiant is insanely fast - and increasing usability by sacrificing some speed sounds OK (for a proud user of i7-7th gen and 64 GB of RAM)

That was the natural order of things - to start with the basic 2D features and move on to the more complicated 3D modes over the years. Having 3D modes in separated windows allowed us to move faster without breaking things that were working well in 2D mode. Sure, the plan for the future is to integrate everything with a unified UI. Without negatively impacting speed or usability, of course.

I'd like to mention a few more not-that-basic features in this discussion.

1) Before the integration of everything into main window - a tricky yet hella useful feature 3D cursor synchronising in all the windows. To be honest I don't care that much about integrating into one window - that sounds more like an eye candy then useful feature. But that would require inter-thread communication.
2) Building a model (either 3D MPR or VR) sometimes is not perfect, i.e. Radiant resparses series in a wrong way - and I don't believe there is a way of making it perfect and automatic, regarding for example variable thickness of slice, variable spacing, gantry tilt, retro-reconstructed series with same id, thickness, spacing, fov... (for a standard axial head), multiple phases in the abdomen studies with same id, and another one with different id... As somebody who understands it I would like to manually pick pictures that will make a model.

(also: a bug. our standard head protocol with 5/2,5 mm with prospective recon to 1,25 mm SOMETIMES is reparsed wrong - as far I worked out it is because constant thickness with variable spacing on the margin between 5/2,5 mm)

3) variable central point of rotation in VR. Preferably set in 3D MPR : )

Thank you for your suggestions. If it's possible for you to send us a sample series that
are parsed incorrectly into 3D volumes, please go ahead - we could try to improve the
volume detection engine.

Say no more^^

http://*************

Two studies performed yesterday, same technician, same ct, one is reparsing nicely and the other is not.

Thanks for providing the studies. We will analyze them.