Pleural Fluid Bilirubin to Serum Bilirubin Ratio, comparison with Light’s Criteria.

M. Yadav, A. Pal, A. Bisht, J. Thapa
{"title":"Pleural Fluid Bilirubin to Serum Bilirubin Ratio, comparison with Light’s Criteria.","authors":"M. Yadav, A. Pal, A. Bisht, J. Thapa","doi":"10.55530/ijmbiosnepal.v5i1.34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Pleural fluid bilirubin and pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio evaluation had been reported by several in distinguishing exudative from transudative pleural effusions along with Light’s Criteria. The aim of this study was to assess whether pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio, was a sensitive marker in classifying the pleural effusion as exudative and transudative and its correlation with Light’s criteria. \nMethods: A cross-sectional, observational study of Pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio ≥ 0.6 for exudates was taken and compared with Light’s criteria overall and its individual parameters to classify exudative and transudative along with the diagnosis. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 16, Sensitivity, specificity, Positive predictive value (PPV), Negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy of each tests were calculated. \nResults: By diagnosis on discharge out of 86 samples of pleural effusion, 78(90.69%) were exudative and 8(9.3%) were transudative effusion. Among transudative effusion, 72 were classified correctly and 6 were misclassified by pleural fluid Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 2/3rd of serum LDH criteria and out of 8 transudative, 4 were misclassified as exudative. When the pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio ≥0.6 was used to differentiate , it categorized 67 as exudative effusion by pleural fluid LDH > 2/3rd of serum LDH criteria and 11 were misclassified as transudative. This criterion had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 85.53%, 50%, 92.88% and 27.78 % respectively with a significant p value of <0.01.  \nConclusion: The pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio can serve as an alternative easy and cost-effective diagnostic tool in differentiating between exudative and transudative pleural effusion. Though, it misclassified 11 exudative pleural fluids as transudative and 4 transudative as exudative. By taking Light’s criteria as a standard, pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio ≥0.6 was found to be inferior to the Light’s criteria also in terms of sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. Still the pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio can serve as an alternative easy and cost-effective diagnostic tool in differentiating between exudative and transudative pleural effusion in low resource settings.","PeriodicalId":359742,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55530/ijmbiosnepal.v5i1.34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Pleural fluid bilirubin and pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio evaluation had been reported by several in distinguishing exudative from transudative pleural effusions along with Light’s Criteria. The aim of this study was to assess whether pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio, was a sensitive marker in classifying the pleural effusion as exudative and transudative and its correlation with Light’s criteria. Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study of Pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio ≥ 0.6 for exudates was taken and compared with Light’s criteria overall and its individual parameters to classify exudative and transudative along with the diagnosis. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 16, Sensitivity, specificity, Positive predictive value (PPV), Negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy of each tests were calculated. Results: By diagnosis on discharge out of 86 samples of pleural effusion, 78(90.69%) were exudative and 8(9.3%) were transudative effusion. Among transudative effusion, 72 were classified correctly and 6 were misclassified by pleural fluid Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 2/3rd of serum LDH criteria and out of 8 transudative, 4 were misclassified as exudative. When the pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio ≥0.6 was used to differentiate , it categorized 67 as exudative effusion by pleural fluid LDH > 2/3rd of serum LDH criteria and 11 were misclassified as transudative. This criterion had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 85.53%, 50%, 92.88% and 27.78 % respectively with a significant p value of <0.01.  Conclusion: The pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio can serve as an alternative easy and cost-effective diagnostic tool in differentiating between exudative and transudative pleural effusion. Though, it misclassified 11 exudative pleural fluids as transudative and 4 transudative as exudative. By taking Light’s criteria as a standard, pleural fluid bilirubin to serum bilirubin ratio ≥0.6 was found to be inferior to the Light’s criteria also in terms of sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV. Still the pleural fluid to serum bilirubin ratio can serve as an alternative easy and cost-effective diagnostic tool in differentiating between exudative and transudative pleural effusion in low resource settings.
胸水胆红素与血清胆红素比值与Light标准的比较。
简介:根据Light的标准,已有几篇关于区分渗出性和透出性胸腔积液的报道,并报道了胸水胆红素和胸水胆红素与血清胆红素比值的评价。本研究的目的是评估胸水胆红素与血清胆红素比值是否为区分胸腔积液为渗出性和渗出性的敏感指标,以及与Light标准的相关性。方法:采用胸膜液胆红素与血清胆红素比值≥0.6对渗出物进行横断面观察研究,并与Light的总体标准及其单项参数进行比较,根据诊断对渗出物和渗出物进行分类。采用SPSS 16进行统计学分析,计算各项试验的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(Positive predictive value, PPV)、阴性预测值(Negative predictive value, NPV)及诊断准确率。结果:86例胸腔积液经排出诊断,渗出性78例(90.69%),渗出性8例(9.3%)。经胸腔积液乳酸脱氢酶(LDH)≥血清LDH标准2/3者,正确分类72例,误分类6例;8例经胸腔积液中,误分类4例为渗出性。当胸水与血清胆红素比值≥0.6时,根据胸水LDH > 2/3的血清LDH标准将67例误诊为渗出性积液,11例误诊为渗出性积液。该标准的敏感性、特异性、PPV和NPV分别为85.53%、50%、92.88%和27.78%,p值均<0.01。结论:胸腔积液与血清胆红素比值可作为鉴别渗出性和渗出性胸腔积液的一种简便、经济的诊断手段。然而,它将11种渗出性胸腔液错误地分类为渗出性,4种错误地分类为渗出性。以Light标准为标准,胸膜液胆红素与血清胆红素比值≥0.6,在敏感性、特异性、PPV和NPV方面也不如Light标准。尽管如此,在低资源环境下,胸水与血清胆红素的比值仍可作为一种简便、经济的诊断工具,用于区分渗出性和渗出性胸腔积液。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信