Table 4.

Diagnostic results of DWI on a per-lesion or per-segment basis

Study	TP	FP	FN	TN	SEN (%)	SPE (%)	Note
Kumar et al.	17	10	6	27	0.74	0.73	PZ
Aydin et al.	34	17	82	77	0.29	0.82
Koo et al.	75	42	130	553	0.37	0.93	b = 300
	160	49	45	546	0.78	0.92	b = 700
	174	38	31	557	0.85	0.94	b = 1,000
	152	22	53	573	0.74	0.96	b = 2,000
Ibrahiem et al.	57	10	11	14	0.84	0.58	PZ
Kim et al.	158	49	22	443	0.88	0.9	b = 1,000
	128	40	52	452	0.71	0.92	b = 2,000
Yamamura et al.	57	17	5	221	0.92	0.93
Girometti et al.	4	14	8	182	0.33	0.93
Selnæs et al.	23	10	8	114	0.74	0.92	PZ
Portalez et al.	16	15	25	352	0.39	0.96	PZ
Tamada et al.	39	11	64	286	0.38	0.96
Rinaldi et al.	42	0	6	9	0.88	1.0
Yagci et al.	58	34	11	155	0.84	0.82	PZ
Weidner et al.	11	11	3	7	0.79	0.39	PZ
Kim et al.	51	6	3	64	0.94	0.91	PZ
	9	11	1	59	0.90	0.84	TZ
Chen et al.	42	37	9	164	0.82	0.82
Iwazawa et al.	150	114	34	414	0.82	0.78	PZ
	88	109	46	469	0.66	0.81	CZ
Miao et al.	121	29	23	123	0.84	0.81
Isebaert et al.	359	44	617	732	0.37	0.94
Vilanova et al.	37	8	14	81	0.73	0.91
Peng et al.	49	6	12	37	0.8	0.86
Lim et al.	171	57	56	340	0.75	0.86

TP true positive, FP false positive, FN false negative, TN true negative, SEN sensitivity, SPE specificity, PZ peripheral zone, TZ transition zone, CZ central zone