ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Diagnostic Utility of Cell Cytology, Cell Block, Pleural Brushing, and Pleural Biopsy in Exudative Pleural Effusions.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundExudative pleural effusion is a common clinical problem with diverse etiologies, often requiring invasive procedures for definitive diagnosis. While conventional cytology is widely used, its diagnostic yield remains limited. Ancillary methods such as cell block (CB) preparation, pleural brushing, and thoracoscopic pleural biopsy may enhance diagnostic accuracy.
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic utility of pleural fluid cell cytology (CC), CB, pleural brushing, and pleural biopsy in patients with exudative pleural effusion.
methodsThis prospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital and included 49 patients with exudative pleural effusion. All patients underwent pleural fluid analysis, cytology, CB preparation, and medical thoracoscopy with pleural brushing and biopsy. Diagnostic yields, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each modality were calculated using pleural biopsy as the reference standard.
resultsThe study population had a mean age of 52.4 ± 15.2 years, with 59% of male participants. Malignancy was the most frequent etiology (55%), followed by tuberculosis (28.5%) and nonspecific pleuritis (14.2%). Diagnostic yield was highest for pleural biopsy (83.6%), followed by pleural brushing (80.9%), CB (61.9%), and CC (38.1%). Sensitivity and specificity were 44.4% and 100% for cytology, 59.2% and 100% for CB, and 80.9% and 100% for pleural brushing, respectively. The combination of cytology and CB improved diagnostic yield compared to cytology alone.
conclusionConventional cytology alone has limited sensitivity in diagnosing exudative pleural effusions. CB and pleural brushing significantly improve diagnostic yield, while pleural biopsy remains the gold standard. Incorporating CB and pleural brushing into routine practice may enable earlier and more accurate diagnosis, particularly in suspected malignant effusions.
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.