Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Radiol. Feb 28, 2016; 8(2): 200-209
Published online Feb 28, 2016. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v8.i2.200
Published online Feb 28, 2016. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v8.i2.200
18F-FDG | 18F-NaF | |
Sensitivity (%) | 75.00 (55.10-88.00) | 91.67 (74.15-97.68) |
Specificity (%) | 99.00 (84.54-100) | 76.19 (54.91-89.37) |
Positive predictive value (%) | 99.00 (82.41-100) | 81.48 (63.3 91.82) |
Negative predictive value (%) | 77.78 (59.24-89.39) | 88.89 (67.2-96.90) |
Error rate (%) | 13.33 (6.26-26.18) | 15.56 (7.75-28.78) |
Accuracy (%) | 86.67 (73.82-93.74) | 84.44 (71.22-92.25) |
Youden's index | 0.75 (0.75-0.74) | 0.6786 (0.68-0.6718) |
- Citation: Capitanio S, Bongioanni F, Piccardo A, Campus C, Gonella R, Tixi L, Naseri M, Pennone M, Altrinetti V, Buschiazzo A, Bossert I, Fiz F, Bruno A, DeCensi A, Sambuceti G, Morbelli S. Comparisons between glucose analogue 2-deoxy-2-(18F)fluoro-D-glucose and 18F-sodium fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography in breast cancer patients with bone lesions. World J Radiol 2016; 8(2): 200-209
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8470/full/v8/i2/200.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4329/wjr.v8.i2.200