Comportamiento de las células nucleadas en los distintos tipos de derrame pleural

Ferreiro, Lucía; García-Pereiro, Thaís; José, Esther San; Toubes, María E.; Suárez-Antelo, Juan; Dobaño, José Manuel Álvarez; Barcala, Francisco Javier González; Núñez, Natalia; Lama, Adriana; Valdés, Luís

doi:10.1016/j.rce.2016.12.014

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reason is that disease stage at the moment of thoracocentesis and previous antibiotic therapy may affect neutrophil percentage. [31] Therefore, although segmented neutrophil percentage is quite specific, its sensitivity is low. Otherwise said in other words, a low percentage of neutrophils does not rule out IPE.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of infectious pleural effusion using predictive models based on pleural fluid biomarkers

Ferreiro¹,

Lado-Baleato

Suárez-Antelo

et al. 2019

Ann Thorac Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Diagnosis of pleural infection (PI) may be challenging. The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a clinical prediction model for the diagnosis of PI based on pleural fluid (PF) biomarkers.METHODS:A prospective study was conducted on pleural effusion. Logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood of having PI. Two models were built using PF biomarkers. The power of discrimination (area under the curve) and calibration of the two models were evaluated.RESULTS:The sample was composed of 706 pleural effusion (248 malignant; 28 tuberculous; 177 infectious; 48 miscellaneous exudates; and 212 transudates). Areas under the curve for Model 1 (leukocytes, percentage of neutrophils, and C-reactive protein) and Model 2 (the same markers plus interleukin-6 [IL-6]) were 0.896 and 0.909, respectively (not significant differences). However, both models showed higher capacity of discrimination than their biomarkers when used separately (P < 0.001 for all). Rates of correct classification for Models 1 and 2 were 88.2% (623/706: 160/177 [90.4%] with infectious pleural effusion [IPE] and 463/529 [87.5%] with non-IPE) and 89.2% (630/706: 153/177 [86.4%] of IPE and 477/529 [90.2%] of non-IPE), respectively.CONCLUSIONS:The two predictive models developed for IPE showed a good diagnostic performance, superior to that of any of the markers when used separately. Although IL-6 contributes a slight greater capacity of discrimination to the model that includes it, its routine determination does not seem justified.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%