Table 3. ¹⁸F-FDG-PET for predicting aggressive histopathologic features in liver transplant patients with HCC.

Authors	n	PET−/PET+ (n)	Predicting poor grading (Sensitivity/Specificity/PPV/NPV/Accuracy)	Predicting MVI (Sensitivity/Specificity/PPV/NPV/Accuracy)
Yang et al.70	38	25/13	47.8%/85.7%/84.6%/50%/60.5%	77.8%/79.3%/53.8%/92%/78.9%
Kornberg et al.72	42	26/16	83.3%/69.4%/31.3%/96.1%/71.4%	82.3%/92%/87.5%/88.5%/88.1%
Kornberg et al.73	91	36/19	76.4%/70.3%/37.1%/92.9%/71.4%	81.1%/90.7%/85.7%/87.5%/86.8%
Lee et al.75	191	136/55	37.3%/81.7%/75.5%/46%/51.3%	45.4%/83.9%/66%/69.1%/67.5%
Lee et al.76	280	190/90	(beyond MC) 52.6%/62.3%/61.2%/53.8%/57.1%	(beyond MC) 58.4%/68.6%/67.2%/60%/63.3%
Hsu et al.78	147	117/30	100%/80.7%/6.7%/100%/81%	30.3%/85.7%/56.7%/66.7%/64.6%

Abbreviations: MC, Milan criteria; NPV, negative predictive value; PET, positron emission tomography; PPV, positive predictive value.