Table 4

Results of the Per-Segment Analysis

AllSingle-Source CTDual-Source CTp Values
No HRCHRCp ValueNo HRCHRCp ValueSingle- vs. Dual-Source CT Without HRCSingle- vs. Dual-Source CT With HRCSingle-Source With vs. Dual-Source CT Without HRC
n2,868671809743645
Evaluable2,644/2,868552/671755/809<0.001711/743626/645NS<0.0010.0020.05
(92%)(82%)(93%)(96%)(97%)
(91%–93%)(79%–85%)(91%–95%)(94%–97%)(95%–98%)
Sensitivity133/15519/2933/39NS45/4936/38NS0.009NSNS
(86%)(66%)(85%)(92%)(95%)
(79%–90%)(47%–80%)(70%–93%)(81%–97%)(83%–99%)
Specificity2,456/2,489518/523702/716NS657/662579/588NSNSNSNS
(99%)(99%)(98%)(99%)(99%)
(98%–100%)(98%–100%)(97%–99%)(98%–100%)(97%–99%)
Positive predictive133/16619/2433/47NS45/5036/47NSNSNSNS
 value(80%)(79%)(70%)(90%)(80%)
(73%–86%)(60%–91%)(56%–81%)(79%–96%)(66%–89%)
Negative predictive2,456/2,578518/528702/708NS657/661579/581NSNSNSNS
 value(99%)(98%)(99%)(99%)(100%)
(99%–99%)(97%–99%)(98%–100%)(99%–100%)(99%–100%)
Correctly2,589/2,868537/671735/809<0.001702/743615/645NS<0.0010.0010.009
 classified(90%)(80%)(91%)(95%)(95%)
(89%–91%)(77%–83%)(89%–93%)(93%–96%)(93%–97%)

CT = computed tomography; HRC = heart rate control.

  • In evaluable segments.

  • Correctly classified: the proportion of segments that were classified as “evaluable” and correctly determined as to the absence or presence of a stenosis. For each value, the actual numbers, percentage, and 95% confidence interval are provided.