Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Feb 21.
Published in final edited form as: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011 Nov 18;6(1):14–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2011.10.014

Table 2.

Diagnostic accuracy of CT protocol versus reference MI per patient and per vessel

Sensitivity, % (95% CI) Specificity, % (95% CI) PPV, % (95% CI) NPV, % (95% CI) Accuracy, % (95% CI)
Per patient
 DCE 79 (58–93) 88 (68–97) 86 (65–97) 81 (61–93) 83 (70–93)
 Rest 67 (45–84) 92 (73–99)* 89 (65–97) 73 (54–88) 79 (65–90)
 Cine 79 (58–93) 88 (68–97) 86 (65–97) 81 (61–93) 83 (70–93)
 Combined interpretation 88 (68–97) 92 (73–99)* 91 (72–99)* 88 (69–97) 90 (77–97)*
 DCE + cine 92 (73–99)* 79 (58–93) 81 (62–94) 90 (70–99)* 85 (72–94)
 Rest + cine 83 (63–95) 79 (58–93) 80 (59–93) 83 (61–95) 81 (67–91)
 Rest + DCE 83 (63–95) 83 (63–95) 83 (63–95) 83 (63–95) 83 (70–93)
Per vessel
 DCE 56 (38–73) 90 (83–95)* 63 (44–80)* 87 (79–92) 82 (75–88)
 Rest 56 (38–73) 89 (82–94) 61 (42–78) 87 (79–92) 81 (74–87)
 Cine 65 (46–80) 87 (80–93) 61 (43–77) 89 (81–94) 82 (75–88)
 Combined interpretation 82 (65–93)* 83 (74–89) 60 (44–74) 94 (87–98)* 83 (75–88)*
 DCE + cine 71 (53–85) 83 (74–89) 56 (40–71) 90 (83–95) 80 (72–86)
 Rest + cine 74 (56–87) 81 (72–88) 54 (39–69) 91 (83–96) 79 (72–85)
 Rest + DCE 74 (56–87) 85 (76–91) 60 (43–71) 91 (84–96) 82 (75–88)
 SPECT 85 (69–95) 97 (92–99) 91 (75–98) 96 (90–99) 94 (89–98)

PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.

*

Highest value.