James,

In our labs we use short (3-5 sec) digital loops to document venous 
compressions. Trying to balance file size and effective documentation, the 
short clips work well for this study type.  With practice one can show about 
one compression per second, so a good representation of the venous system 
still takes around 100Mb (depending on digital compression at the ultrasound 
system and at the PACS).  We have experience with the still-frame 
compressed/uncompressed method too, but I strongly prefer the ability to 
show the reader the process of compression which is much easier to visually 
track the anatomic location and dynamics. 

While storage continues to get cheaper by the day and broadband access 
gets faster, what you ultimately use will depend in part on where the files get 
transmitted.  If you're in a fixed-site hardwired network like a hospital, file size 
is almost a non-issue, especially compared with some of the data-heavy 
imaging modalities.  

ICAVL standards and the SVU Professional Performance Guideline for venous 
exams both allow either method, so choose what works best for you and your 
readers.

Dave Parlato



On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 06:48:22 -0800, Phan, James 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Happy Holidays to all !
> 
>Is it possible for me to get feed back from the vascular community on
>the following questions?
>
> 
>
>1)      How do you record your lower extremity venous duplex study? Cine
>Loop vs. Static Images?
>
>2)      If you are using cine loop, how many seconds per cine loop? and
>why?
>
>3)      If you are using static images, how many images for the femoral
>vein? and why?
>
>4)      Do SVU and ICAVL have an opinion on this cine loop vs. static
>images?
>
>5)      Are there any references to these methods?
>
>Thank you,
>James

To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
http://list.uvm.edu/archives/uvmflownet.html