Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 24;38(11):1036–1045. doi: 10.1007/s11604-020-01008-1

Table 2.

Detection of the IT and ULP on non-ECG-gated CTA, single-diastolic-phase ECG-gated CTA, and full-phase ECG-gated CTA; all cases, AD and IMH

Non-ECG-gated CTA Single-diastolic-phase ECG-gated CTA Full-phase ECG-gated CTA P value* P value P value
All cases (n = 204)
 Accuracy 79 (85, 74) 84 (89, 79) 89 (93, 85) 0.13 0.008 0.001
 Sensitivity 61 (74, 48) 64 (78, 52) 87 (96, 78)
 Specificity 86 (92, 80) 91 (95, 86) 90 (95, 85)
AD (n = 97)
 Accuracy 79 (87, 71) 79 (87, 71) 90 (96, 84) 1.0 0.020 0.029
 Sensitivity 59 (77, 41) 55 (73, 37) 93 (100, 84)
 Specificity 88 (96, 81) 90 (97, 82) 88 (96, 81)
IMH (n = 107)
 Accuracy 79 (87, 72) 88 (94, 82) 90 (95, 84) 0.038 0.15 0.016
 Sensitivity 64 (82, 45) 76 (93, 59) 80 (93, 59)
 Specificity 84 (92, 76) 91 (98, 85) 93 (98, 87)

Data are presented as percentages with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses, unless otherwise indicated

IT intimal tear, ULP ulcer-like projection, ECG electrocardiogram, CTA CT angiography, AD aortic dissection, IMH intramural hematoma

*Non-ECG-gated CTA vs single-diastolic-phase ECG-gated CTA

Single-diastolic-phase ECG-gated CTA vs full-phase ECG-gated CTA

Non-ECG-gated CTA vs full-phase ECG-gated CTA