ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Diagnostic value of biochemical ratios in the differential diagnosis of tuberculous and malignant pleural effusions.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThe differential diagnosis between tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) and malignant pleural effusion (MPE) in patients with pleural effusion (PE) continues to pose significant clinical challenges. While conventional pleural fluid cytology has limited sensitivity, invasive diagnostic procedures are often costly or inaccessible, particularly in resource-limited settings. In this study, we investigated the diagnostic contribution of ratios derived from pleural fluid adenosine deaminase (ADA), total protein, serum lactate dehydrogenase (S-LDH), and pleural effusion lactate dehydrogenase (PE-LDH) levels in patients with histopathological confirmed pleural effusion etiology. Specifically, the diagnostic performance of biochemical and hematological parameters, particularly the ADA/serum protein, S-LDH/ADA and PE-LDH/ADA ratios were evaluated for their ability to discriminate between TPE and MPE.
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted among patients who underwent diagnostic evaluation and treatment for pleural effusion at a tertiary referral hospital between 1 November 2014 and 1 November 2024. A total of 1,003 patients with pleural effusion (397 TPE and 606 MPE: 409 primary, 133 metastatic, and 64 mesothelioma) were included, whose etiologies were determined using a composite reference standard based on clinical, radiological, microbiological, and histopathological findings, with multidisciplinary team (MDT) evaluation applied in selected cases where appropriate. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to determine diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and optimal cut-off values.
resultsPatients with TPE were significantly younger than those with MPE (median age: 32 vs. 65 years, p < .001). Overall, 62.9% of the study population were male. ADA levels were significantly higher in the TPE group, whereas S-LDH levels were higher in the malignant effusion group. When ratio-based parameters were evaluated, the S-LDH/ADA ratio was markedly higher in patients with malignant pleural effusion and emerged as the most powerful discriminatory marker, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.938, sensitivity of 89.5%, and specificity of 91.3%. The ADA/serum protein ratio also demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy for differentiating TPE, with an AUC of 0.929, sensitivity of 89.9%, and specificity of 93.3%. In multivariate analysis, the S-LDH/ADA ratio, ADA/serum protein ratio, and PE-LDH/ADA ratio remained independently associated with diagnostic discrimination between TPE and MPE.
conclusionsBiochemical ratios particularly the S-LDH/ADA and PE-ADA/serum protein ratios are reliable, minimally invasive diagnostic tools for distinguishing TPE from MPE. These ratios are especially useful in guiding clinical decision-making in settings where access to invasive diagnostic procedures is limited.
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.