Observational studyJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2018
Repeatability of pleural adenosine deaminase measurements in diagnostic evaluation of pleural effusions.
Observational study in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discrimination of Exudative Pleural Effusions Based on Pleural Adenosine Deaminase (ADA)-C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Levels, and Their Combination: An Observational Prospective Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Repeatability of pleural adenosine deaminase measurements in diagnostic evaluation of pleural effusions.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA follow-up thoracentesis is proposed in suspected atypical tuberculosis cases. The study aimed to define the variability of pleural ADA values across repeated thoracenteses in different types of pleural effusions (PEs) and to evaluate whether ADA variance, in regard to the cutoff value of 40 U/L, affected final diagnosis.
methodsA total of 131 patients with PEs of various etiologies underwent three repeated thoracenteses. ADA values were subsequently estimated.
results82% and 55% of patients had greater than 10% and 20% deviation from the highest ADA value, respectively. From those patients who had a variance of 20%, 36% had only increasing ADA values, while 19% had only decreasing values. Considering the cutoff value of 40 U/L, only in two cases, ADA decreased below this threshold, which concerned a man with tuberculous pleurisy and a woman with lymphoma both in the course of treatment. Furthermore, only in two cases with rising values, ADA finally exceeded the cutoff limit, which concerned a man with rheumatoid pleurisy and a man with tuberculous pleurisy. Surprisingly, malignant PEs (MPEs) showed a higher percentage of increasing values compared to all other exudates that did not, however, exceed the threshold.
conclusionThe determination of pleural ADA levels is a reproducible method for rapid tuberculosis diagnosis. The detected measurement deviations do not appear to affect final diagnosis. In specific situations, repeated ADA measurements may be valuable in directing further diagnostic evaluation. More investigation is needed to elucidate the possible prognostic significance of the increasing trend in ADA values in MPEs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.