Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26150911›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2015

Tuberculous pleural effusions: advances and controversies.

Morné J Vorster, Brian W Allwood, Andreas H Diacon, Coenraad F N Koegelenberg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

116 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 247 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Morné J VorsterDepartment of Medicine, Divisions of Pulmonology, Stellenbosch University & Tygerberg Academic Hospital, Cape Town 8000, South Africa.
Brian W AllwoodDepartment of Medicine, Divisions of Pulmonology, Stellenbosch University & Tygerberg Academic Hospital, Cape Town 8000, South Africa.
Andreas H DiaconDepartment of Medicine, Divisions of Pulmonology, Stellenbosch University & Tygerberg Academic Hospital, Cape Town 8000, South Africa.
Coenraad F N KoegelenbergDepartment of Medicine, Divisions of Pulmonology, Stellenbosch University & Tygerberg Academic Hospital, Cape Town 8000, South Africa.
Stellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On a global scale, tuberculosis (TB) remains one of the most frequent causes of pleural effusions. Our understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease has evolved and what was once thought to be an effusion as a result of a pure delayed hypersensitivity reaction is now believed to be the consequence of direct infection of the pleural space with a cascade of events including an immunological response. Pulmonary involvement is more common than previously believed and induced sputum, which is grossly underutilised, can be diagnostic in approximately 50%. The gold standard for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis remains the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in pleural fluid, or pleural biopsy specimens, either by microscopy and/or culture, or the histological demonstration of caseating granulomas in the pleura along with acid fast bacilli (AFB). In high burden settings, however, the diagnosis is frequently inferred in patients who present with a lymphocytic predominant exudate and a high adenosine deaminase (ADA) level, which is a valuable adjunct in the diagnostic evaluation. ADA is generally readily accessible, and together with lymphocyte predominance justifies treatment initiation in patients with a high pre-test probability. Still, false-negative and false-positive results remain an issue. When adding closed pleural biopsy to ADA and lymphocyte count, diagnostic accuracy approaches that of thoracoscopy. The role of other biomarkers is less well described. Early pleural drainage may have a role in selected cases, but more research is required to validate its use and to define the subpopulation that may benefit from such interventions.

Indexed as

pleural biopsyPleural effusionthoracentesistuberculosis (TB)

Identifiers

PMID26150911
PMCPMC4466424
OpenAlexW2168508368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.