Table 3.
Comparison of diagnostic performance of observers A and B depending on segment location.
| Segment Location | Observer | n | TP | TN | FP | FN | Sen. % | Spe. % | PPV % | NPV % | Acc. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proximal | Observer A | 470 | 0 | 465 | 5 | 0 | / | 98.9% | 0.0% | 100.0% | 98.9% |
| Observer B | 0 | 466 | 4 | 0 | / | 99.1% | 0.0% | 100.0% | 99.1% | ||
| Difference Δ | 0 | −1 | 1 | 0 | / | −0.2% | 0.0% | 0.0% | −0.2% | ||
| Distal | Observer A | 986 | 0 | 800 | 184 | 2 | 0.0% | 81.3% | 0.0% | 99.8% | 81.1% |
| Observer B | 0 | 805 | 179 | 2 | 0.0% | 81.8% | 0.0% | 99.8% | 81.6% | ||
| Difference Δ | 0 | −5 | 5 | 0 | 0.0% | −0.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | −0.5% |
ICA was used as the standard of reference. Thresholds for coronary artery disease were ICA ≥ 50% diameter and CT-FFR ≤ 0.80. Acc. = accuracy; CT-FFR= CT-derived fractional flow reserve; FN = false negative; FP = false positive; ICA = invasive coronary angiography; NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value; Sen. = sensitivity; Spe. = specificity; TN = true negative; TP = true positive.