Table 2.

Algorithm performance for each of the seven ablation sites

Ablation site	Sensitivity (%)						Specificity (%)						PPV (%)						NPV (%)
	EASY-WPW		PAMBRUN		ARRUDA		EASY-WPW		PAMBRUN		ARRUDA		EASY-WPW		PAMBRUN		ARRUDA		EASY-WPW		PAMBRUN		ARRUDA
	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18	All	< 18
Total	92	82	81	70	68	61	99	98	97	95	96	95	96	95	83	72	74	61	99	98	97	95	96	95
TV anteroseptal	100	100	94	100	100	100	100	100	98	94	97	96	100	100	80	57	74	67	100	100	99	100	100	100
TV posteroseptal	98	100	89	85	82	77	92	84	90	82	87	79	82	65	77	58	70	56	99	100	96	95	93	91
TV posterolateral	80	63	53	38	20	0	100	100	90	98	96	100	100	100	67	75	30	9	99	94	96	91	94	94
TV anterolateral	93	100	71	78	29	38	100	100	99	98	100	100	100	100	83	88	100	100	100	100	98	96	95	91
MV anterolateral	95	90	93	90	98	90	100	100	98	98	97	100	100	100	91	90	89	100	99	98	98	98	99	98
MV posterolateral	90	91	76	64	67	70	100	100	99	100	97	94	200	100	97	100	85	94	98	98	94	92	92	94
MV posteroseptal	88	33	88	33	81	50	99	100	98	96	95	94	92	100	85	33	70	94	98	96	98	96	97	98

Algorithm performance for each of the seven ablation sites in the entire cohort of patients compared to the subgroup of children < 18 years old. Particularly good results were achieved with our EASY-WPW algorithm in the presence of a right-sided antero- or posteroseptal AP. TV, tricuspid valve; MV, mitral valve; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value; All, all patients; < 18, subgroup of children < 18 years old.