Reply to Letter to the Editor: “Importance of Pretest Probability for Calculating Positive Predictive Value”
1Department of Chest Diseases, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye
2Department of Radiology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye
3Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye
4Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Center for Thrombosis and Hemostasis (CTH), Mainz, Germany
Anatol J Cardiol 2024; 28(12): 610-610 PubMed ID: 39475174 PMCID: 11633788 DOI: 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4803
Full Text PDF

CONTENT

To the Editors,

We thank the authors for their comments1 and contributions. We also recognized the unexpectedly high positive predictive values for echocardiography and computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA). As we checked the SPSS dataset and output, we recognized typos.2 While preparing the manuscript, the numbers were written incorrectly in Table 5. The corrected PPVs would be 41% for CTPA and 55% for transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). We have added the correct version of Table 5. We thank the authors for reminding us.

Echocardiography was not performed to detect PFO. Operators reported it if they noticed it during the procedure. So, we didn’t use contrast echocardiography.

References

  1. Erdem A, Oğuz M, Yılmaz İ, Babaoğlu M, Uzun M. . . ;():-.
  2. Erol S, Gürün Kaya A, Arslan F. Agreement between transthoracic echocardiography and computed tomography pulmonary angiography for detection of right ventricular dysfunction in pulmonary embolism. Anatol J Cardiol. 2024;28(8):393-398. https://doi.org/10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.3562
  3. . Anatol J Cardiol. . 2024;28((10)):511-. 10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.3562