Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28816982›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Performance of procalcitonin in diagnosing parapneumonic pleural effusions: A clinical study and meta-analysis.

Chao He, Bo Wang, Danni Li, Huan Xu, Yongchun Shen

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Procalcitonin: A promising tool or just another overhyped test?International journal of medical sciences · 2020
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Understanding diagnostic tests. Part 1.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia
    Article
  12. Understanding diagnostic tests. Part 2.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia
    Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chao HeDepartment of Laboratory Medicine Intensive Care Unit Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China.
Bo Wang
Danni Li
Huan Xu
Yongchun Shen
Intensive Care Society · GBSichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParapneumonic pleural effusion (PPE) is a common complication of pneumonia. The accurate diagnosis of PPE remains a challenge. Recent studies suggest that procalcitonin (PCT) emerges as a potential biomarker for PPE. Our study aimed to determine the diagnostic value of PCT for PPE by a clinical study and summarize the overall diagnostic performance of PCT through a meta-analysis.

methodsDemographic and clinical data of the patients with PPE and controls were collected in our clinical study. The diagnostic performances of serum PCT (s-PCT) were analyzed via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, using area under the curve (AUC) as a measure of accuracy. Literature databases were systematically searched for the studies examining the accuracy of PCT for diagnosing PPE. Data on sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative likelihood ratio (PLR/NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled. Summary ROC curves and AUC were used to evaluate overall test performance.

resultsIn our clinical study, 47 patients with PPE and 101 controls were included. The s-PCT levels were significantly increased in the setting of PPE (5.44 ± 9.82 ng/mL) compared with malignant PE (0.15 ± 0.19 ng/mL), tuberculous PE (0.18 ± 0.16 ng/mL), and transudates (0.09 ± 0.03 ng/mL) (P < .001). Using a cutoff value of 0.195 ng/mL, the sensitivity and specificity of s-PCT in diagnosing PPE were 0.83 and 0.80, respectively, and AUC was 0.89. In addition, 11 studies were included in our meta-analysis. Summary performance estimates for s-PCT in diagnosing PPE were as follows: sensitivity, 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.84); specificity, 0.74 (95% CI: 0.69-0.78); PLR, 3.46 (95% CI: 2.09-5.74); NLR, 0.27 (95% CI: 0.14-0.54); DOR, 12.37 (95% CI: 4.34-41.17); and AUC, 0.84. The corresponding estimates for p-PCT were as follows: sensitivity, 0.62 (95% CI: 0.57-0.67); specificity, 0.71 (95% CI: 0.68-0.75); PLR 2.31 (95% CI: 1.81-2.95); NLR, 0.47 (95% CI: 0.35-0.63); DOR, 5.48 (95% CI: 3.07-9.77); and AUC, 0.80.

conclusionBoth s-PCT and p-PCT might have modest performance in diagnosing PPE. However, more studies on a large scale should be performed to confirm our findings.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiomarkersBlood GlucoseCalcitoninFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPleural EffusionROC CurveSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersBlood GlucoseCalcitonin

Identifiers

PMID28816982
PMCPMC5571719
OpenAlexW2749721532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.