More robust DICOM reading #90
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks! Any idea why the IS element(s) can't be parsed in those files? Were non-numeric characters added during anonymization? |
|
There was a text inserted during anonymization instead of a number. IIRC pydicom and Slicer read it just fine, keeping the text there. That would also be a valid option instead of converting to 0. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I've made a couple of modifications to DICOM.jl to handle poorly anonymized files. This can prevent some crashes, and the IS parsing issue was quite hard to debug. I'm submitting it here in case you think it would be useful to have it in the library.