Table 2.
The diagnostic performance of routinely acquired and reported Computed Tomography (CT) imaging in 315 patients with suspected Pleural Malignancy. Results are stratified based on relevant image acquistion and reporting factors.
| Sensitivity (95% CI) | Specificity (95% CI) | PPV (95% CI) | NPV (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All patients (n = 315) | 58% (51–65%) | 80% (72–87%) | 83% (75–89%) | 54% (46–61%) |
| Image Acqusition | ||||
| Venous-phase contrast CT (n = 284) | 61% (53–68%) | 82% (73–88%) | 85% (77–90%) | 56% (48–64%) |
| CTPA (arterial-phase contrast) (n = 31) | 27%* (9–53%) | 69% (38–90%) | 55% (21–86%) | 40% (20–63%) |
| Image Reporting | ||||
| Specialist Thoracic Radiologist (n = 115) | 68% (55–79%) | 75% (61–86%) | 78% (66–88%) | 63% (50–76%) |
| Non-specialist Thoracic Radiologist (n = 200) | 53%** (44–62%) | 84% (73–92%) | 86% (76–92%) | 50% (40–59%) |
| Optimal Acquistion and Reporting | ||||
| Venous-phase contrast CT reported by a thoracic radiologist (n = 108) | 69% (56–80%) | 73% (58–85%) | 78% (65–88%) | 63% (48–76%) |
CI; Confidence Interval, PPV; Positive Predictive Value, NPV; Negative Predictive Value, CTPA; CT pulmonary angiography.
*
p < 0.01 (CTPA vs. venous-phase CT).
**
p < 0.05 (thoracic vs. non-thoracic radiology reporting).