Skip to main content
. 2015 Jul 27;26:1159–1179. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3908-8

Table 3.

Results

First author Year of publ. Cases for review Cause of death Major diagnoses Minor diagnoses
Agreement (95%CI) Sensitivity (95%CI) Agreement (95%CI) Sensitivity (95%CI) Agreement (95%CI) Sensitivity (95%CI)
Non-invasive methods Puranik [45] 2014 11 MRI: 11/11 = 100 %
(71.5; 100)
CT: 3/11 = 27.3 %
(6.0; 61.0)
MRI: 10/10 = 100 %
(69.2; 100)
CT: 2/10 = 20 %
(2.5; 55.6)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Roberts [37] 2012 182 (-6)1 ῍70 %῍
(62.6; 76.4)
n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r
Takahashi [38] 2012 16 (-2)1 10/16 = 62.5 %
(35.4; 84.8)
8/14 = 57.1 %
(28.9; 82.3)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Westphal [39] 2012 24 n/r 17/24 = 70.8 %2
(48.9; 87.4)
death related diagnoses 23/44 = 52.3 %
(36.7; 67.5)
death related diagnoses 23/43 = 53.5 %
(37.7; 68.8)
21/69 = 30.4 %
(19.9; 42.7)
21/45 = 46.7 %
(31.7; 62.1)
Wichmann [46] 2012 47 n/r n/r n/r new major diagnoses
10/14 = 71.4 %
(41.9; 91.6)
new minor diagnoses
26/88 = 29.5 %
(20.3; 40.2)
new minor diagnoses
26/61 = 42.6 %
(30.0; 56.0)
Roberts [47] 2003 10 n/r 6/10 = 60 %2
(26.2; 87.8)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Patriquin [48] 2001 7 n/r 3/7 = 42,9 %2
(9.9; 81.6)
13/34 = 38.2 %
(22.2; 56.4)
death related diagnoses 6/15 = 40 %
(16.3; 67.7)
13/23 = 56.5 %
(34.5; 76.8)
death related diagnoses 6/11 = 54.5 %
(23.4; 83.3)
8/39 = 20.5 %
(9.3; 36.5)
8/23 = 34.8 %
(16.4; 57.3)
Minimally invasive methods With radiological imaging Wichmann [49] 2014 50 n/r n/r new major diagnoses
13/16 = 81.3 %
(54.4; 96.0)
overall diagnoses
405/590 = 68.6 %
(64.7; 72.4)
new major diagnoses
13/14 = 92.9 %
(66.1; 99.8)
overall diagnoses
402/474 = 84.8 %
(81.3; 87.9)
new minor diagnoses
140/238 = 58.8 %
(52.3; 65.1)
new minor diagnoses
140/190 = 73.7 %
(66.8; 79.8)
Ross [43] 2012 19* n/r 18/19 = 94.7 %2
(74.0; 99.9)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Bolliger [44] 2010 19* n/r 17/19 = 89.5 %2
(66.9; 98.7)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Weustink [50] 2009 30 23/30 = 76,7 %
(57.7; 90.1)
n/r 129/140 = 92.1 %
(86.4; 96.0)
overall diagnoses 2019/2056 = 98.2 %
(97.5; 98.7)
129/137 = 94.2 %
(88.8; 97.5)
overall diagnoses 255/273 = 93.4 %
(89.8; 96.1)
n/r n/r
Fariña [40] 2002 81 64/81 = 79.0 %
(68.5; 87.3)
n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r
Fariña [41] 1998 130 (-29)1 120/130 = 92.3 %
(86.3; 96.3)
n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r
Without Fan [51] 2010 16 15/16 = 93.8 %
(69.8; 99.8)
based on 18 cases
“90 %” (65.3; 98.6)
n/r n/r n/r n/r
Cacchione [52] 2001 7 combined with review of patients’ hospital records ῍100 %” (59.0; 100) n/r n/r n/r n/r n/r
Huston [42] 1996 20(-1 or more)1 12/20 = 60 %
(36.1; 80.9)
11/19 = 57.9 %
(33.5; 79.8)
new major diagnoses 20/24 = 83.3 %
(62.6; 95.3)
new major diagnoses 12/16 = 75 %
(47.6; 92.7)
cultures 39/46 = 84.8 %
(71.1; 93.7)
cultures 10/15 = 66.6 %
(38.4; 88.2)

1Some cases should still be excluded, for these deceased were younger than 18 years of age or died from an unnatural cause of death

2Originally reported as being agreement

* Some of the included cases seem to overlap