Scatter plots of the agreement beyond chance of US vs. CT and US vs. MRI.

<p>Scatter plots of the agreement beyond chance of US vs. CT and US vs. MRI.</p

Number of cysts per WHO cyst stage (CE 1–5) as determined by US (N = 187).

<p>Number of cysts per WHO cyst stage (CE 1–5) as determined by US (N = 187).</p

In-house MRI protocols with detailed sequence parameters.

1<p>TrueFisp: True Fast Imaging With Steady Precession,</p>2<p>TR: Repetition Time,</p>3<p>TE: Time to Echo.</p>4<p>FLASH: Fast Low Angle Shot,</p>5<p>TSE: Turbo-Spin-Echo,</p>6<p>HASTE: Half fourier-Acquired Single shot Turbo spin Echo, w: weighted.</p

Scatter plots of the agreement beyond chance of US versus MRI.

<p>Scatter plots of the agreement beyond chance of US versus contrast enhanced T1w-FLASH, TrueFisp, HASTE and T2w-TSE MRI modes.</p

Levels of agreement and kappa coefficients for US vs. CT, US vs. MRI and US vs. different MRI sequences.

1<p>FLASH: Fast Low Angle Shot,</p>2<p>TSE: Turbo-Spin-Echo,</p>3<p>TrueFisp: True Fast Imaging With Steady Precession,</p>4<p>HASTE: Half fourier-Acquired Single shot Turbo spin Echo (or corresponding sequences of other manufacturers than Siemens). Differences in number of cysts are due to varieties in MRI-protocols, especially of ex-domo-patients.</p

Levels of agreement and kappa coefficients for US vs. CT and for US vs. MRI stratified by WHO stages (defined by US).

<p>Cyst-stage specific kappa values: CT are more to the lower end of the category “good” (0.61–0.80), MRI at the upper end of the category “very good” (0.81–1.0).</p

“Best case” of CT/MR imaging.

<p>CE1: unilocular, simple cysts with liquid content and often with the CE1-specific “double line sign”, CE2: multivesicular, multiseptated cysts, CE3a: cysts with liquid content and the CE3a-specific detached endocyst, CE3b: unilocular cysts with daughter cysts inside a mucinous or solid cyst matrix, CE4: heterogenous solid cysts with degenerative, CE4-specific canalicular structure of the cyst content, and CE5: cysts with degenerative content and heavily calcified wall.</p

Criteria for identifying patients with low probability for CCS≥800 and implementation in the clinical routine.

<p>A. Criteria determined during the control phase for the identification of patients, where CCS does not need to be performed (i.e. patients with ≤3% pre-test probability for CCS≥800). B. Implementation of the proposed algorithm in the clinical routine.</p

<i>Contribution of CCS and CCTA to total radiation exposure using prospective versus retrospective CCTA protocols</i>.

<p>With retrospective CCTA, CCS contributed to only 6–9% of the total radiation exposure. Conversely, with prospective scans, CCS contributed to 40–50% of the total radiation exposure, when low-tube voltage and BMI-adapted imaging parameters were applied.</p

<i>Flow chart.</i>

<p>732 consecutive ‘control phase’ and 200 ‘CCTA phase’ patients undergoing 64-slice or 256-scile CCTA and using different acquisition protocols.</p