ArticleCureus2026
Diagnostic Utility of Pleural Fluid Lactate and Pleural Fluid-to-Serum Lactate Ratio in Differentiating Various Etiologies of Exudative Pleural Effusions: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExudative pleural effusion presents a frequent diagnostic dilemma in clinical practice, particularly in regions where tuberculosis is highly prevalent. Although Light's criteria, adenosine deaminase (ADA), and cytological analysis are routinely used, their diagnostic performance is limited by issues related to specificity, sensitivity, and processing time. Recently, pleural fluid lactate and the pleural fluid-to-serum (P/S) lactate ratio have been investigated as adjunctive biochemical markers for etiological differentiation.
objectivesThe primary objectives of this study were to evaluate pleural fluid lactate levels and to assess the diagnostic performance of the P/S lactate ratio in patients with exudative pleural effusion. Additionally, the study aimed to determine the utility of these biomarkers in differentiating tubercular, malignant, parapneumonic, and other etiologies using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
methodsThis cross-sectional observational study included 50 adult patients diagnosed with exudative pleural effusion according to Light's criteria. Based on clinical, radiological, cytological, and microbiological findings, patients were categorized into tubercular, malignant, parapneumonic, and miscellaneous groups. Pleural fluid and serum lactate levels were measured using a point-of-care blood gas analyzer, and the P/S lactate ratio was calculated. Diagnostic performance was analyzed using ROC curves.
resultsTubercular effusion was identified in 27 patients (54%), malignant effusion in 13 (26%), parapneumonic effusion in seven (14%), and miscellaneous causes in three (6%). Median pleural fluid lactate levels were highest in parapneumonic effusions (7.6 mmol/L; IQR 7.2-8.2), followed by tubercular (4.5 mmol/L; IQR 4.2-5.2) and malignant effusions (1.82 mmol/L; IQR 1.5-7.5) (p<0.01). A pleural lactate cut-off value >7 mmol/L effectively identified parapneumonic/complicated effusions. The mean P/S lactate ratio was significantly higher in tubercular effusions compared to non-tubercular effusions (5.29±2.17 vs. 3.20±2.34; p<0.01).
conclusionPleural fluid lactate and the P/S lactate ratio offer useful adjunctive information in the evaluation of exudative pleural effusions. While absolute lactate values assist in identifying parapneumonic effusions, the P/S ratio provides additional value in differentiating tubercular from non-tubercular causes. These parameters may improve diagnostic efficiency, particularly in resource-constrained settings.
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.