Table 1.
Paper | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | N (number of patients) | Type of study | Imaging |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) Bazot et al. 2004 [5] | 90.3% | 91% | 92.1% | 89% | 195 | Prospective | 1.5 T |
(2) Chamié et al. 2009 [40] | 89.4% | 92.3% | 96.7% | 77.4% | 92 | Prospective | 1.5 T |
(3) Roy et al. 2009 [3] | 73% | 93% | 84% | 88% | 47 | Retrospective | 1.5 T |
(4) Hottat et al. 2009 [18] | 96.3% | 100% | 100% | 97.6% | 41 | Prospective | 3.0 T |
(5) Jarlot et al. 2008 [13] | 78% | 70% | 86% | 58% | 35 | Prospective | 1.5 T |
(6) Saba et al. 2012 [8] | 86% | 73% | 88% | 24% | 59 | Prospective | 1.5 T |