Fig 2.

Mean time for interpretation. A, Both readers had significantly reduced interpretation time using nC-MIP and oC-MIP compared with CUBE and IR-FSPGR-BRAVO, saving at least 50 seconds per case (on average). B, The use of nC-MIP and oC-MIP with the option to cross-reference an equivocal lesion to the source images (nC-MIP+XR and oC-MIP+XR, respectively) did not result in a significant change in interpretation time compared with the use of nC-MIP or oC-MIP alone. However, time for interpretation for all CUBE MIPs was significantly reduced compared with CUBE. Error bars represent the SD. One-way ANOVA with a Bonferroni adjustment. Triple asterisks indicate P < .001; ns, no significance.