Table 4.
Results of the assessment of CPTA reading in subgroups of the InShape II study population while completing the InShape II algorithm 3–6 months after acute PE
| Numbers (n, %) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Numbers (n, %) | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical pre-test probability* | ||||||||||
| Low n = 245 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 2 | High n = 96 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 7 | |||||||||
| Presence of ≥ 3 of 6 predictors of CTEPH | 13 (5.3) | 50 (1.3–99) | 95 (92–97) | 7.7 (1.8–27) | 99.6 (98–99.9) | 24 (25) | 43 (9.9–82) | 76 (66–85) | 13 (5.3–27) | 94 (90–97) |
| Overall judgment: CTEPH present | 9 (3.7) | 100 (16–100) | 97 (94–99) | 22 (12–37) | 100 | 18 (19) | 86 (42–99.6) | 87 (78–93) | 33 (21–48) | 99 (93–99.7) |
| Presence of symptoms suggestive of CTEPH despite low clinical pre-test probability # | ||||||||||
| No n = 280 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 7 | Yes n = 61 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 2 | |||||||||
| Presence of ≥ 3 of 6 predictors of CTEPH | 34 (12) | 43 (9.9–82) | 89 (84–92) | 8.8 (3.7–20) | 98 (97–99) | 3 (4.9) | 50 (91.3–99) | 97 (88–99.6) | 33 (6.7–78) | 98 (93–99.5) |
| Overall judgment: CTEPH present | 25 (8.9) | 86 (42–99.6) | 93 (89–96) | 24 (16–35) | 99.6 (98–99.9) | 2 (3.3) | 100 (16–100) | 100 (94–100) | 100 | 100 |
| Sex | ||||||||||
| Male n = 167 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 7 | Female n = 174 (n, %) including CTEPH n = 2 | |||||||||
| Presence of ≥ 3 of 6 predictors of CTEPH | 21 (13) | 43 (9.9–82) | 89 (83–93) | 14 (6.0–30) | 97 (95–99) | 16 (9.2) | 50 (1.3–99) | 91 (86–95) | 6.3 (1.5–22) | 99 (98–99.8) |
| Overall judgment: CTEPH present | 16 (9.6) | 100 (59–100) | 94 (90–97) | 44 (29–59) | 100 | 11 (6.3) | 50 (1.3–99) | 94 (90–97) | 9.1 (2.2–31) | 99 (98–99.897) |
Notes: Values of diagnostic accuracy and predictive values are denoted as percentage, 95%CI
*Based on a clinical CTEPH prediction score of > 6.[11; 13]
# Based on a clinical CTEPH prediction score of < 7. [11; 13]