Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Cardiol. Apr 26, 2017; 9(4): 304-311
Published online Apr 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i4.304
Published online Apr 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i4.304
Table 1 Comparative analysis of the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease detection using various imaging modalities1
Modality | Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | Diagnostic accuracy |
SPECT | 80%-100% | 40%-50% | 90%-95% | 90%-95% | 75%-80% |
DSE | 80%-85% | 60%-80% | 80%-90% | 45%-60% | 75%-80% |
PET | 85%-90% | 80%-85% | 85%-90% | 80%-95% | 80%-85% |
CCT | 70%-90% | 85%-90% | 90%-95% | 90%-95% | 90%-95% |
CMR | 95%-100% | 90%-95% | 90%-95% | 90%-95% | 95%-100% |
- Citation: Bomb R, Kumar S, Chockalingam A. Coronary artery disease detection - limitations of stress testing in left ventricular dysfunction. World J Cardiol 2017; 9(4): 304-311
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8462/full/v9/i4/304.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v9.i4.304