Top 9 PACS Systems

By on October 15, 2012

Entries for the Top PACS Systems are far ahead of when I began working with Picture Archive Communications Systems back in the year 2000.  At that time PACS was just Top 9 Best PACS Systems for Healthcarein its’ infancy and steadily evolving.

At one of my first PACS installations, we used a StorageTek 9710 Tape Library for long term archiving and had a 1 terabyte RAID for ‘on-line’ storage.

At that time it seemed like a huge amount of space.  Although after all of the system ‘overhead’, there was only about 6oo gigabytes out of the 1 terabyte left.

There wasn’t a lot of resources out there either. A quick search on Amazon and I found lots of great resources as you can see below.  You can even buy medical grade monitors on Amazon.

Nowadays tape libraries have been replaced by different tiers of spinning disk online storage. The terabytes of storage we used to discuss have changed to petabytes in some cases.

Especially when dealing with region systems.

In my service region we started implementing PACS at a research facility as a pilot project with a goal of having a regional PACS system spanning the entire province. Leveraging the success of that first implementation would lead to installing at additional hospitals.

As that first installation progressed, eventually the PACS data center was receiving ‘remote’ images from rural health centers. At the time it was an amazing accomplishment.

In Canada geography is a huge challenge and obstacle.  There are many patients who live in rural areas or distant cites that lack the required health care providers in their immediate area. Many rural patients are hundreds of miles away from health centers with the required health care providers.

It’s also challenging for physicians and radiologists to travel in a timely manner as well to service those patents. In the year 2000 to have the ability for radiologists to view images for a patient that was hundreds of miles away only minutes after acquiring CTs, X-rays or Ultrasounds was a life saver.

Fast forward to 2012 and the landscape has changed considerably.  There are many more vendors involved in PACS, the architecture has changed considerably including cloud computing, integration with dictation systems, huge increases in storage requirements and now PACS service extends beyond the radiology department.

Although technology prices have dropped considerably, PACS still requires a significant capital expense.  In order for organizations to leverage the costs and infrastructure of PACS the ‘enterprise’ as a whole needs to be considered. This includes added integration capabilities for documents, images and electronic health records.

When dealing with images in healthcare the DICOM protocol is the universal standard for image transfer, so  that’s obviously a requirement for the PACS environment.  In addition to DICOM,  there are a few additional requirements expected when dealing with enterprise healthcare.

  • Hardware agnostic
  • HL7 compatible
  • Having an API (Application Programming Interface)
  • XDS capable (cross enterprise document sharing)
  • Migration capabilities
Currently a large percentage of the PACS market is for upgrades or updates from older systems.  During this surge of upgrades, it became apparent that not all PACS systems were compatible.  Although PACS vendors were all using DICOM, some implemented the standard differently than others as well as using private DICOM tags.
These issues especially manifested when dealing with data migrations from an older systems to a new ones.  This issues would also occur when the upgrades were with the existing vendor going from an older to a newer software version.
There has also been a lot of talk lately about VNAs or Vendor Neutral Archives.  I started a LinkedIn discussion  thread some time ago about Vendor Neutral Archives and received some interesting and informative feedback.
In my opinion just because a vendor says, ‘our company has a VNA’, doesn’t make it one.  A ‘Vendor Neutral Archive’ is more of a marketing term than it is a declaration of functionality.  There is not a standard that determines what a VNA can or can’t do.  This functionality is left up to the vendor and it can vary widely.
If all a VNA can do is accept DICOM, then it’s not much of a VNA.  Today’s PACS archives need to look towards enterprise integration for XDS, HL7 and APIs to connect to other systems and databases.  The archive is all about integration and this is no easy task given the number of different systems.
PACS vendors all follow the same standards (DICOM, HL7, XDS etc).  However which standards vendors adopt can be different. As a result integration different systems can be challenging.

About dkorolyk

I've been involved in Healthcare IT and PACS since Y2k. Over the years I've been fortunate enough to be involved in a lot of interesting an diverse projects. My experience also includes numerous HL7/EMR integration projects as well as many hardware and software platforms. My three main areas of expertise include technical integration aspects of radiology, oncology and laboratory diagnostics.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Join 1000s of other Healthcare IT Professionals

Enter your email below to get the latest News on Healthcare IT, Training Events and Career Information

We hate SPAM too. Your email is safe with us.