Clinical significance of SUVmax in 18F-FDG PET/CT scan for detecting nodal metastases in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma

SpringerPlus

Table 2 Level-by-level diagnostic performance of three methods (CT, PET/CT with best SUVmax cut-off, and PET/CT with level-based modified SUVmax cut-off)

	TP	FN	TN	FP	Sensitivity	Specificity	PPV	NPV	Accuracy
	TP	FN	TN	FP	95 % CI	95 % CI	95 % CI	95 % CI	95 % CI
CT	12	16	215	7	42.9^a,b	96.8	63.2	93.1	90.8^c
CT					24.6–61.2	94.5–99.1	41.5–84.9	89.8–96.4	87.2–94.4
FDG-PET/CT using best SUVmax cut-off (3.5)	19	9	210	12	67.9^a	94.6	61.3	95.9	91.6
FDG-PET/CT using best SUVmax cut-off (3.5)					50.6–85.2	91.6–97.6	59.8–62.8	93.3–98.5	88.2–95.0
FDG-PET/CT usinglevel-based modified SUVmax cut-off	20	8	213	9	71.4^b	95.9	69	96.4	93.2^c
FDG-PET/CT usinglevel-based modified SUVmax cut-off					54.7–88.1	93.3–98.5	67.6–70.5	93.9–98.9	90.1–96.3

TP true positive, FN false negative, TN true negative, FP false positive, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, CI confidence interval
^aThe sensitivity of FDG-PET/CT with best SUVmax cut-off (3.5) was significantly higher than that of CT (p = 0.023)
^bThe sensitivity of FDG-PET/CT with level-based modified SUVmax cut-off was significantly higher than that of CT (p = 0.013)
^cThe accuracy of FDG-PET/CT with level-based modified SUVmax cut-off was significantly higher than that of CT (p = 0.041)