DWI loading from DICOM

Support
5

Thanks for sharing the data. The DWI sequence is 1866:

BWH003265:1861 inorton$ for f in *; do echo $f; dcmdump $f/$(ls $f | head -n 1) | grep Description; done
1863
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [localizer]                              #  10, 1 SeriesDescription
1864
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [SAG TSE T1]                             #  10, 1 SeriesDescription
1865
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [AX TSE T2 H.R.]                         #  14, 1 SeriesDescription
1866
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [AX DWI]                                 #   6, 1 SeriesDescription
1867
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [AX DWI_ADC]                             #  10, 1 SeriesDescription
1868
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [AX SPACE]                               #   8, 1 SeriesDescription
1869
(0008,1030) LO [NEURO HEAD^BRAIN]                       #  16, 1 StudyDescription
(0008,103e) LO [COR MPR]                                #   8, 1 SeriesDescription

But the following basic tags are empty: Manufacturer (0008,0070) and Siemens SoftwareVersion (0018, 1020) so DWIConvert cannot identify the dataset, and falls back to a generic reader implementation, which fails. Certainly the error message could be improved!

However, this data does not have any diffusion-weighting tags, and there are only three volumes total in series 1866 ([1] looks like baseline, [2,3] look like gradient-weighting). So, it could not be used to calculate diffusion tensors or higher-order models.

I tried converting with dcm2nii, which does produce a valid 3-volume NIfTI, but does not extract any diffusion-weighting information (as expected since there are no tags available).

It looks like this data was very aggressively anonymized. If you have more information about the scanner or other details then we could figure out if the raw data would be supported.