Pleural tuberculosis (TB), a form of extrapulmonary TB, can be difficult to diagnose. High numbers of lymphocytes in pleural fluid have been considered part of the diagnostic criteria for pleural TB; however, in many cases, neutrophils rather than lymphocytes are the predominant cell type in pleural effusions, making diagnosis more complicated. Additionally, there is limited information on the clinical and laboratory characteristics of neutrophil-predominant pleural effusions caused by Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB). To investigate clinical and laboratory differences between lymphocyte- and neutrophil-predominant pleural TB, we retrospectively analyzed 200 patients with the two types of pleural TB. Of these patients, 9.5% had neutrophil-predominant pleural TB. Patients with lymphocyte-predominant and neutrophil-predominant pleural TB showed similar clinical signs and symptoms. However, neutrophil-predominant pleural TB was associated with significantly higher inflammatory serum markers, such as white blood cell count (P = 0.001) and C-reactive protein (P = 0.001). Moreover, MTB was more frequently detected in the pleural fluid from patients in the neutrophil-predominant group than the lymphocyte-predominant group, with the former group exhibiting significantly higher rates of positive results for acid-fast bacilli in sputum (36.8 versus 9.4%, P = 0.003), diagnostic yield of MTB culture (78.9% versus 22.7%, P < 0.001) and MTB detected by polymerase chain reaction (31.6% versus 5.0%, P = 0.001). Four of seven patients with repeated pleural fluid analyses revealed persistent neutrophil-predominant features, which does not support the traditional viewpoint that neutrophil-predominant pleural TB is a temporary form that rapidly develops into lymphocyte-predominant pleural TB. In conclusion, neutrophil-predominant pleural TB showed a more intense inflammatory response and a higher positive rate in microbiological testing compared to lymphocyte-predominant pleural TB. Pleural TB should be considered in neutrophil-predominant pleural effusions, and microbiological tests are warranted.
Unfavorable outcomes were less frequent in the group B than in the group A, indicating that treatment regimen modification according to DST results on liquid medium could improve treatment outcomes in patients with rifampicin-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis. Further studies are required to confirm these findings to overcome the small number of unfavorable outcomes.
BackgroundEndosonography with needle aspiration (EBUS/EUS-NA) is recommended as the first choice for mediastinal nodal assessment in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). It is important to maintain adequate negative predictive value of the procedure to avoid unnecessary additional surgical staging, but there are few studies on the influence of operator-related factors including competency on false negative results. This study aims to compare the false negative rate of individual operators and whether it changes according to accumulation of experience.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of NSCLC patients who were N0/N1 by EBUS/EUS-NA and confirmed by pathologic staging upon mediastinal lymph node dissection (n = 705). Patients were divided into a false negative group (finally confirmed as pN2/N3) and a true negative group (pN0/N1). False negative rates of six operators and whether these changed according to accumulated experience were analyzed.ResultsThere were 111 (15.7%) false negative cases. False negative rates among six operators ranged from 8.3 to 21.4%; however, there were no statistical differences before and after adjustment for patient characteristics and procedure-related factors (P = 0.346 and P = 0.494, respectively). In addition, false negative rates did not change as each operator accumulated experience (P for trend = 0.632).ConclusionsOur data suggest that there would be no difference in false negative rates regardless of which operator performs the procedure assuming that the operators have completed a certain period of observation and have performed procedures under the guidance of an expert.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12890-018-0774-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.