Diagnostic utility of pleuroscopic guided pleural biopsy versus pleural fluid cell block in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion.

Q3 Medicine
Medical Journal of Malaysia Pub Date : 2025-03-01
B H Ng, H J Low, N N N Abeed, C I Soo, M I Azmi, N S Sharil, R A Osman, M F A Hamid, A Y L Ban
{"title":"Diagnostic utility of pleuroscopic guided pleural biopsy versus pleural fluid cell block in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion.","authors":"B H Ng, H J Low, N N N Abeed, C I Soo, M I Azmi, N S Sharil, R A Osman, M F A Hamid, A Y L Ban","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pleural biopsy using flex-rigid pleuroscopy or pleural effusion cell block analysis is useful for diagnosing malignant pleural effusion. However, the current literature lacks documented comparisons between pleural biopsies and cytological cell blocks. This study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of pleural biopsy and cytological cell block in identifying malignant pleural effusion.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted on patient data from those who underwent pleuroscopy at Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz from January 2021 to December 2023. We included patients with pleural effusion who underwent both cell block and pleural biopsy with a confirmed diagnosis of malignancy through histopathological examination. At least 200 ml of pleural fluid was collected, followed by the biopsy of six or more pleural tissue samples.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of the 196 pleuroscopy procedures analysed, 91 patients were diagnosed with malignant pleural effusion. Malignancy was diagnosed in 50 (54.9%) cases using cell block analysis, whereas pleural biopsy identified malignancy in 81 (89%) cases. The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for pleural biopsy compared to pleural fluid cell block [89% (81/91) vs. 54.9% (50/91); p < 0.001]. Among patients with negative results on pleural fluid cell block, 33 (36.3%) had positive results on pleural biopsy. The definitive diagnoses of malignancy included 64 (70.3%) cases of lung adenocarcinoma, 4 (4.4%) cases of lung squamous carcinoma, 2 (2.2%) cases of small cell lung cancer, 2 (2.2%) cases of mesothelioma, and 19 (20.9%) cases of metastatic carcinoma. Eight (8.8%) patients exhibited negative findings on both pleural fluid cell block and pleural biopsy. Further diagnoses were achieved through computed tomography-guided needle tru-cut biopsy of the lung in 6 patients (6.6%), transbronchial lung biopsy in 1 patient (1.1%), and cervical lymph node biopsy in 1 patient (1.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Pleural biopsy exhibits superior diagnostic accuracy compared to pleural fluid cell block analysis for malignant pleural effusion. In cases where cell block results are negative but suspicion remains high, pleural biopsy remains a crucial diagnostic tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":39388,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Malaysia","volume":"80 2","pages":"168-173"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Malaysia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Pleural biopsy using flex-rigid pleuroscopy or pleural effusion cell block analysis is useful for diagnosing malignant pleural effusion. However, the current literature lacks documented comparisons between pleural biopsies and cytological cell blocks. This study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of pleural biopsy and cytological cell block in identifying malignant pleural effusion.

Materials and methods: A retrospective review was conducted on patient data from those who underwent pleuroscopy at Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz from January 2021 to December 2023. We included patients with pleural effusion who underwent both cell block and pleural biopsy with a confirmed diagnosis of malignancy through histopathological examination. At least 200 ml of pleural fluid was collected, followed by the biopsy of six or more pleural tissue samples.

Results: Out of the 196 pleuroscopy procedures analysed, 91 patients were diagnosed with malignant pleural effusion. Malignancy was diagnosed in 50 (54.9%) cases using cell block analysis, whereas pleural biopsy identified malignancy in 81 (89%) cases. The diagnostic yield was significantly higher for pleural biopsy compared to pleural fluid cell block [89% (81/91) vs. 54.9% (50/91); p < 0.001]. Among patients with negative results on pleural fluid cell block, 33 (36.3%) had positive results on pleural biopsy. The definitive diagnoses of malignancy included 64 (70.3%) cases of lung adenocarcinoma, 4 (4.4%) cases of lung squamous carcinoma, 2 (2.2%) cases of small cell lung cancer, 2 (2.2%) cases of mesothelioma, and 19 (20.9%) cases of metastatic carcinoma. Eight (8.8%) patients exhibited negative findings on both pleural fluid cell block and pleural biopsy. Further diagnoses were achieved through computed tomography-guided needle tru-cut biopsy of the lung in 6 patients (6.6%), transbronchial lung biopsy in 1 patient (1.1%), and cervical lymph node biopsy in 1 patient (1.1%).

Conclusion: Pleural biopsy exhibits superior diagnostic accuracy compared to pleural fluid cell block analysis for malignant pleural effusion. In cases where cell block results are negative but suspicion remains high, pleural biopsy remains a crucial diagnostic tool.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Medical Journal of Malaysia
Medical Journal of Malaysia Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: Published since 1890 this journal originated as the Journal of the Straits Medical Association. With the formation of the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA), the Journal became the official organ, supervised by an editorial board. Some of the early Hon. Editors were Mr. H.M. McGladdery (1960 - 1964), Dr. A.A. Sandosham (1965 - 1977), Prof. Paul C.Y. Chen (1977 - 1987). It is a scientific journal, published quarterly and can be found in medical libraries in many parts of the world. The Journal also enjoys the status of being listed in the Index Medicus, the internationally accepted reference index of medical journals. The editorial columns often reflect the Association''s views and attitudes towards medical problems in the country. The MJM aims to be a peer reviewed scientific journal of the highest quality. We want to ensure that whatever data is published is true and any opinion expressed important to medical science. We believe being Malaysian is our unique niche; our priority will be for scientific knowledge about diseases found in Malaysia and for the practice of medicine in Malaysia. The MJM will archive knowledge about the changing pattern of human diseases and our endeavours to overcome them. It will also document how medicine develops as a profession in the nation. We will communicate and co-operate with other scientific journals in Malaysia. We seek articles that are of educational value to doctors. We will consider all unsolicited articles submitted to the journal and will commission distinguished Malaysians to write relevant review articles. We want to help doctors make better decisions and be good at judging the value of scientific data. We want to help doctors write better, to be articulate and precise.
×
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