Table 2:

Diagnostic performance of morphologic MRI alone, quantitative DWI alone, qualitative DWIMRI, and quantitative DWIMRI with ADCmean < 1.22 × 10−3 mm2/s

Morphologic MRIQuantitative DWI with ADCmean < 1.22Morphologic MRI with Qualitative DWIMorphologic MRI with Quantitative DWI (ADCmean < 1.22)
TP (No.)30303435
TN (No.)52565962
FP (No.)13963
FN (No.)8843
Sensitivity (%)a78.978.989.492.1
    (95% CI)(65.9–91.9)(65.9–91.9)(79.7–99.2)(83.5–100.0)
Specificity (%)b80.086.190.895.4
    (95% CI)(70.3–89.7)(74.8–93.1)(83.7–97.8)(90.3–100.0)
PPV (%)69.776.985.092.1
    (95% CI)(56.1–83.5)(60.3–88.3)(73.9–96.1)(83.5–100.0)
NPV (%)86.687.593.695.4
    (95% CI)(78.1–95.3)(76.3–94.1)(87.6–99.6)(90.2–100.0)
LR+c3.945.709.6919.9
    (95% CI)(2.36–6.59)(3.04–10.68)(4.48–20.9)(6.58–60.5)
LR−d0.260.240.110.08
    (95% CI)(0.14–0.49)(0.13–0.45)(0.04–0.29)(0.03–0.24)
  • Note:—TP indicates true-positive; TN, true-negative; FP, false-positive; FN, false-negative; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.

  • a Comparison of sensitivities: MRI vs DWI: P = 1; MRI vs qualitative DWIMRI: P = .10; MRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .025; qualitative DWIMRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .31; DWI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .05.

  • b Comparison of specificities: MRI vs DWI: P = .34; MRI vs qualitative DWIMRI: P = .05; MRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .004; qualitative DWIMRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .18; DWI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .03.

  • c Comparison of LR+: MRI vs DWI: P = .36; MRI vs qualitative DWIMRI: P = .03; MRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .004; qualitative DWIMRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .17; DWI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .02.

  • d Comparison of LR−: MRI vs DWI: P = .85; MRI vs qualitative DWIMRI: P = .06; MRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .01; qualitative DWIMRI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .24; DWI vs quantitative DWIMRI: P = .04.