Table 3.
The Diagnostic Performances of all the SWE Methods.
| Variables | Cut-off value | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | AUC | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-mean (kPa) | 39.6 | 77.4 | 87.9 | 85.5 | 64.8 | 93.1 | 0.844 | 0.773–0.914 |
| (48/62) | (189/215) | (237/277) | (48/74) | (189/203) | ||||
| SWS-mean (m/s) | 3.53 | 75.8 | 87.9 | 85.2 | 64.4 | 92.6 | 0.825 | 0.752–0.898 |
| (47/62) | (189/215) | (236/277) | (47/73) | (189/204) | ||||
| ESD (kPa) | 19.9 | 82.2 | 91.6 | 89.5 | 73.9 | 94.7 | 0.894 | 0.832–0.955 |
| (51/62) | (197/215) | (248/277) | (51/69) | (197/208) | ||||
| SWSSD (m/s) | 1.14 | 75.8* | 95.8* | 91.3 | 83.9※ | 93.2 | 0.896 | 0.840–0.953 |
| (47/62) | (206/215) | (253/277) | (47/56) | (206/221) | ||||
| SWATC display | 91.9★ | 90.7 | 90.9 | 74.0 | 97.5 | 0.913 | 0.868–0.958 | |
| (57/62) | (195/215) | (252/277) | (57/77) | (195/200) | ||||
| SWATC display+ SWSSD | 93.5* | 89.3* | 90.2 | 71.6 | 97.9 | 0.914 | 0.871–0.957 | |
| (58/62) | (192/215) | (250/277) | (58/81) | (192/196) |
SWSSD = standard deviation of shear wave speed; E-mean = the mean elasticity; ESD = standard deviation of elasticity; SWS-mean = the mean shear wave speed; PPV = positive predictive value; NPV = negative predictive value; CI = confidence interval; AUC = area under characteristic curve;
SWATC = shear wave arrival time contour.
*There are statistically significant difference between sensitivity and specificity of SWSSD and SW arrival time contour+SWSSD.(P < 0.05)
★SW arrival time contour display showed higher sensitivity compared with E-mean, SWS-mean, and SWSSD with statistically significant difference. (P < 0.05)
※SWSSD had higher PPV compared with E-mean, SWS-mean, ESD, SWATC display and SW arrival time contour+ SWSSD with statistically significant difference (P < 0.05).