2012
DOI: 10.5830/cvja-2011-029
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The value of serum tumour markers in the prediction of aetiology and follow up of patients with pericardial effusion

Abstract: BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the value of tumour markers in the differential diagnosis of pericardial effusions and to assess their changing levels during follow up.MethodsSixty-nine patients who were admitted to hospital with a diagnosis of pericardial effusion were included in the study. Serum tumour markers were measured on admission and after a mean of 18 ± 7 months’ follow up. An aetiological diagnosis was made on clinical evaluation, imaging techniques and biochemical, microbiological … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…CEA level is known to increase in heart failure and this marker has also been used for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions [19] . Many studies demonstrated an association between elevated CEA level and peri-cardiac effusions with malignant etiologies [20] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CEA level is known to increase in heart failure and this marker has also been used for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions [19] . Many studies demonstrated an association between elevated CEA level and peri-cardiac effusions with malignant etiologies [20] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…634-638 treatment. Bone resorption markers may be particularly useful for the follow-up of bisphosphonate treatment, which is increasingly used in the management of bone metastases [8,9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But the evaluation of results largely depends on the professional knowledge of pathologists. The sensitivity is only 30-50%, and a large number of samples are required ( 5 , 6 ). Moreover, it is difficult to diagnose some atypical cells only with cytological specimens.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%