ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
The role of the pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase/adenosine deaminase ratio in differentiating between tuberculosis pleural effusion and parapneumonic effusion: a retrospective cohort study and meta-analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In regions with a high prevalence of tuberculosis, it is crucial to accurately differentiate between tuberculosis pleural effusion (TPE) and parapneumonic effusion (PPE). The current study aimed to evaluate the potential role of the pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)/adenosine deaminase (ADA) ratio in differentiating between TPE and PPE. Methods: In the first section, the pleural fluid LDH/ADA ratio was compared between 45 patients with TPE and 81 patients with PPE within our study population, and its diagnostic efficacy was assessed. In the second section, we conducted a meta-analysis incorporating six previous publications and the current study. Results: In our study population, a cut-off value of 18.63 for the pleural fluid LDH/ADA ratio was established for diagnostic performance analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) to discriminate between TPE and PPE was 0.960 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.902 to 0.989]. As for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), positive predictive value and negative predictive value, they were 94.44% (95% CI: 81.3% to 99.3%), 84.85% (95% CI: 73.9% to 92.5%), 6.23 (95% CI: 3.50 to 11.09), 0.065 (95% CI: 0.017 to 0.25), 77.3% (95% CI: 65.6% to 85.8%), and 96.6% (95% CI: 87.9% to 99.1%), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of the pleural fluid LDH/ADA ratio was further tested and confirmed in the subsequent meta-analysis. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 90% (95% CI: 82% to 94%) and 91% (95% CI: 84% to 95%), respectively. Conclusions: The current study suggests that the pleural fluid LDH/ADA ratio is a useful marker for distinguishing TPE from PPE.
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.