1naresh
Array
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)
1naresh
Array
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)


TABLE 6: 
Diagnostic performance of CT angiography in the assessment of carotid artery stenosis on the symptomatic side compared with DSA
Analysis Method of CT AngiographySensitivity (%)Specificity (%)Overall Accuracy (%)PPV (%)NPV (%)
Visual100 (21/21)50 (7/14)80 (28/35)75 (21/28)100 (7/7)
Combined MPR*95 (20/21)86 (12/14)91 (32/35)91 (20/22)92 (12/13)
Visual-quantitative†95 (20/21)93 (13/14)94 (33/35)95 (20/21)93 (13/14)
  • Note.—PPV indicates positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value. Numbers in parentheses are number of arteries. A 50% stenosis was the cutoff point for a hemodynamically significant stenosis.
  • * Combined MPR was considered to be positive when either of the MPR (cross-sectional or oblique sagittal) measurements yielded a positive result.
  • † Visual-quantitative analysis consisted of first-line visual CT angiography interpretation and subsequent measurement only for the positive cases.