Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Mar 20;50(5):1651–1658. doi: 10.1002/jmri.26728

Table 1. Sensitivity of NCE-MR, CE-MR, and CT; Individual Interpretations.

This table illustrates the sensitivities of each modality for each of the 15 diagnoses in our cohort. The proportion that answered yes to the question, “did the post-contrast images help or add to the diagnosis in any way?,” are presented along with the response rate. Total cases sum to 116 as three patients each had two independent diagnoses.

Diagnosis Count Individual Sensitivities
NCE-MR CE-MR Did Contrast Help? (response rate) CT
Appendicitis 62 89.8%
(85.4 – 94.1%)
96.2%
(93.5 – 99%)
43%
(47%)
96.8%
(94.2 – 99.3%)
Ovarian cyst 19 77.2%
(66.3 – 88.1%)
78.9%
(68.4 – 89.5%)
47%
(86%)
70.2%
(58.3 – 82.1%)
Diverticulitis 7 38.1% 57.1% 71%
(81%)
90.5%
Colitis 4 66.7% 75.0% 36%
(92%)
100%
Enteritis 4 100% 100% 45%
(92%)
83.3%
Ureterolithiasis 4 91.7% 91.7% 36%
(92%)
100%
Epiploic Appendagitis 3 22.2% 33.3% 63%
(89%)
77.8%
Cholecystitis 2 33.3% 50% 33%
(83%)
83.3%
Cholelithiasis 2 0% 0% 33%
(83%)
66.7%
Meckel’s Diverticulitis 2 33.3% 33.3% 100%
(67%)
100%
Pyelonephritis 2 33.3% 100% 100%
(100%)
83.3%
Torsion 2 50% 50% 60%
(80%)
83.3%
Abscess 1 66.7% 66.7% 100%
(67%)
33.3%
Degenerating fibroid 1 100% 100% 100%
(100%)
100%
Ovarian Cancer 1 66.7% 100% 67%
(100%)
0%
All Acute Diagnoses 116 77%
(72.6 – 81.4%)
84.2%
(80.4 – 88%)
50%
(67%)
88.7%
(85.5 – 92.1%)
Non-Appendicitis Diagnoses 54 62.3%
(54.9 – 70%)
70.4%
(63.3 – 77.4%)
55%
(86%)
79.6%
(73.4 – 85.8%)