[Insight-users] SOP instance ID conflict

[Nicholas Tustison]

Thanks Dan, for your response.

Yeah, my first guess was that the numbers I'm generating for each slice in
the volume were not actually random.  But I've done it a few times specifically
to make sure that it appears random.  I also thought (not knowing anything 
about DICOM) that maybe I needed to specify a specific prefix but the IT
people didn't know anything about that.  So I've tried with and without 
prefices where I've copied the prefices from the input dicom files and 
I've tried with the default gdcm prefix as you mention but each time there's
a SOP instance ID conflict.  

Thanks for being willing to look at the images.  Because there's patient
information, I'll send you a link and a password in a private email.

Thanks again,
Nick  





On May 26, 2011, at 3:49 PM, Daniel Blezek wrote:

> Hi Nick,
> 
>  While your UID might look random, if the PACS already has an image with
> that same ID, your C-STORE will be rejected.  Can you re-run your processing
> and verify that a new UID is generated?  dcmdump is very helpful here.
> 
>  I assume you used GDCM.  This has a unique prefix and so should not
> generate collisions.
> 
>  Could you post an image or upload one somewhere?  Sometimes PACS errors
> are not specific enough to understand why an image was rejected.
> 
> Best,
> -dan
> 
> 
> On 5/26/11 6:37 AM, "Nicholas Tustison" <ntustison at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have an issue where I'm trying to push some processed images back
>> to PACS at my institution using storescu.  I get no error message using
>> storescu but I can't find them in the database and they appear lost.
>> The IT people tell me that there is a conflict with the SOP instance ID
>> that is generated for each slice and that images exist already with
>> those same IDs.  However, I can look at the header and clearly see that
>> it is a randomly generated number.
>> 
>> I was hoping to provide my IT people with additional information as I don't
>> think they have much experience with people at the institution wanting to
>> do this type of thing.  I was thinking that perhaps the conflict message might
>> be indicative of an incorrect prefix but that's just a wild guess.  Has
>> anybody
>> else encountered a similar problem?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Nick 
>> _____________________________________
>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>> 
>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>> 
>> Kitware offers ITK Training Courses, for more information visit:
>> http://www.kitware.com/products/protraining.html
>> 
>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ITK FAQ at:
>> http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK_FAQ
>> 
>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>> http://www.itk.org/mailman/listinfo/insight-users
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Blezek, PhD
> Medical Imaging Informatics Innovation Center
> 
> P 127 or (77) 8 8886
> T 507 538 8886
> E blezek.daniel at mayo.edu
> 
> Mayo Clinic
> 200 First St. S.W.
> Harwick SL-44
> Rochester, MN 55905
> mayoclinic.org
> "It is more complicated than you think." -- RFC 1925
>