Table 2. Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac CT in comparison to CMR and SPECT in the detection of myocardial infarction.
| Authors | Patients (n) | CT technique | Other technique | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nikolaou, 2005 (66) | 30 | First pass CCT | DE-CMR | 91 | 79 |
| Habis, 2009 (41) | 26 | DE-CCT | DE-CMR | 90 | 80 |
| Bauer, 2010 (67) | 36 | Dual-energy CCT | DE-CMR (3 Tesla) | 77 | 97 |
| Ko 2014, (68) | 100 | Stress perfusion Dual-energy CCT | Stress perfusion CMR | 89 | 74 |
| Ruzsics, 2009 (30) | 36 | Rest Dual-energy CCT | Stress-rest SPECT | 92 | 93 |
| Cheng, 2010 (32) | 55 | Rest Dual-source CCT | Stress-rest SPECT | Rest: 100 | Rest: 78 |
| Stress: 83.3 | Stress: 90.3 | ||||
| Tanabe, 2016 (69) | 53 | Stress dynamic CCT perfusion | SPECT (n=25) | Abnormal perfused myocardium: 80 | Abnormal perfused myocardium: 86 |
| Severe infarction: 95 | Severe infarction: 72 | ||||
| CMR (n=28) | Abnormal perfused myocardium: 82 | Abnormal perfused myocardium: 87 | |||
| Severe infarction: 78 | Severe infarction: 80 |
CCT, cardiac CT; CMR, cardiac MR; DE, delayed enhancement; SPECT, single-photon emission computed tomography.