The use of pleural fluid procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in the diagnosis of parapneumonic pleural effusions: a systemic review and meta-analysis☆
Article InfoTo view the full text, please login as a subscribed user or purchase a subscription. Click here to view the full text on ScienceDirect.
Fig. 1
Flow chart of study identification and inclusion.
Fig. 2
Assessment of study quality with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria for included studies.
Fig. 3
Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve (solid line) and the bivariate summary estimate (solid square), together with the corresponding 95% confidence ellipse (inner dashed line) and 95% prediction ellipse (outer dotted line). The symbol size for each study is proportional to the study size.
Fig. 4
Forest plot of diagnostic OR for studies using pleural fluid PCT (A) or CRP (B) to differentiate parapneumonic effusions from other etiologies of pleural effusions.
Abstract
Background
We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of pleural fluid procalcitonin (PCT) or C-reactive protein (CRP) in differentiating parapneumonic effusion in patients with pleural effusion.
Methods
We searched the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane database in December 2011. Original studies that reported the diagnostic performance of PCT alone or compared with that of other biomarkers for differentiating the characteristics of pleural effusion were included.
Results
We found 6 qualifying studies including 780 patients with suspected parapneumonic effusion and 306 confirmed cases of parapneumonic effusion. Six studies examined the diagnostic performance of pleural fluid PCT, 3 also tested for serum PCT, and another 3 tested for serum CRP. The bivariate pooled sensitivity and specificity were as follows 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.78) and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.63-0.76), respectively, for pleural fluid PCT; 0.65 (95% CI, 0.55-0.74) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.62-0.74), respectively, for serum PCT; and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.47-0.61) and 0.77 (95% CI, 0.72-0.81), respectively, for serum CRP. There was evidence of significant heterogeneity (I2=55.0%) for pleural fluid or serum PCT but not for CRP (I2=0.0%).
Conclusion
The existing literature suggests that both pleural fluid and serum PCT tests have low sensitivity and specificity for differentiating parapneumonic effusion from other etiologies of pleural effusion. Compared with PCT, serum CRP has higher specificity and a higher positive likelihood ratio, and thus, it has a higher rule-in value than PCT.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Purchase access to this article
Claim Access
If you are a current subscriber with Society Membership or an Account Number, claim your access now.
Subscribe to this title
Purchase a subscription to gain access to this and all other articles in this journal.
Institutional Access
Visit ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
☆Conflict of interest: None declared.
