- Visibility 102 Views
- Downloads 15 Downloads
- DOI 10.18231/j.ijn.2021.006
-
CrossMark
- Citation
Differentiating transudative and exudative pleural effusion by pleural fluid cholesterol
- Author Details:
-
Ayyali Ambresh
-
Shilpa A *
Introduction
Pleural effusions represent a very common diagnostic task to the physician. A correct diagnosis of the underlying disease is essential to the rational management.[1] Normally the pleural space contains only a few millimetres of fluid. Indeed pleural effusion must be regarded as a trivial event but as a sign of major disorder or disease.[2]
The first diagnostic step is the identification of pleural effusions as either a transudate or exudates. This is useful because it indicates the pathophysiological mechanisms involved. Exudates are secondary to alteration of capillary permeability or lymphatic drainage. Transudates are due to either alterations of hydrostatic and / or osmotic pressure in pleural capillaries or to a fluid passing from the peritoneal cavity via diaphragmatic defects.
If an exudate is present further diagnostic procedures and tests are imperative for definitive diagnosis and specific therapy. On the other hand if the fluid is clearly a transudate one need not worry about manoeuvres directed at the pleura and need to treat only the congestive cardiac failure, nephrosis, cirrhosis or hypoproteinemia.[3] Over the years many criteria have been developed by various workers for separation of exudates and transudates.
Objective of the study
To study the diagnostic value of Pleural fluid Cholesterol in differentiating transudative and exudativepleural effusions.
Materials and Methods
Source of data
Data is collected from patients who are attending Medicine OPD and admitted in BLDEU’S Shri B.M.Patil medical college hospital and research centre, Vijayapura.
Period of study is from November 2016 to July 2018
Method of collection of data
Inclusion criteria
Age >18years
Patients with definite clinical diagnosis and Pleural effusion evidenced by radiological imaging
Exclusion criteria
Age <18years
Patients without definitive clinical diagnosis
Patients previously diagnosed and already on treatment
Type of study
Cross sectional descriptive study
Sample size
Using expected incidence of exudates cases among pleural effusion as 69.4%, expected sensitivity as 88%, expected specificity as 100% and desired precision as +/-10%,
The minimum sample is 60.
This sample size will give the precision of 10%for both sensitivity and specificity.
Formula used:
N=z2 (1-p)/d2
Z-value of z statistic at 5% level of significance
d-margin of error
p-expected incidence rate
Statistical analysis
Data will be analysed using mean+/-SD Chi square test for association, comparison of means using test, ANOVA for comparison between and within groups and diagrammatic presentation.
Results and Observation
The present study was undertaken in 60 cases of Pleural Effusion over a period of 2 and half years from November 2016 to July 2018, the results of which are given below.
|
Age (years) |
Male |
Female |
p value |
||
|
N |
% |
N |
% |
||
|
18-20 |
1 |
2.6 |
0 |
0.0 |
0.641 |
|
21-30 |
5 |
13.2 |
4 |
18.2 |
|
|
31-40 |
8 |
21.1 |
7 |
31.8 |
|
|
41-50 |
12 |
31.6 |
3 |
13.6 |
|
|
51-60 |
8 |
21.1 |
5 |
22.7 |
|
|
>60 |
4 |
10.5 |
3 |
13.6 |
|
|
Total |
38 |
100.0 |
22 |
100.0 |
The age of the patient in this study ranged from 18 years to 75 years. 1 patient was 18 years, 9 patients were under 21-30 years, 15 patients were under 31-40 years, 15 patients were under 41-50 years, 13 patients were under 51-60 years, 7 patients were above 60 years. Out of 60 patients there were 38 males and 22 females.[Table 1]
|
Based on lights criteria |
N |
% |
|
Exudate |
46 |
76.7 |
|
Transudate |
14 |
23.3 |
|
Total |
60 |
100 |
Based on Lights criteria, out of 60 patients 46 were exudates (76.7%) and 14 were transudates (23.3%).[Table 2]
|
Based on cholesterol criteria |
N |
% |
|
Exudate |
45 |
75 |
|
Transudate |
15 |
25 |
|
Total |
60 |
100 |
Based on pleural cholesterol level criteria, out of 60 patients 45(75%) were exudates and 15(25%) were transudates.[Table 3]
|
Presenting Symptoms |
Number (n=60) |
Percentage |
|
1. Cough |
50 |
83.3 |
|
2. Fever |
22 |
36.7 |
|
3. Chest pain |
34 |
56.7 |
|
4. Dyspnoea |
47 |
78.3 |
|
5. Swelling of limbs |
10 |
16.7 |
|
6. Distension of abdomen |
10 |
16.7 |
|
7. Facial puffiness |
6 |
10 |
|
8. Loss of appetite |
60 |
100 |
|
9. Loss of weight |
40 |
66.7 |
Cough was present in 50 patients (83.3%), fever in 22 patients (36.7%), chest pain in 34 patients (56.7%), dyspnoea in 47(78.3%), swelling of limbs and abdominal distension each in 10 patients (16.7%), facial puffiness in 6 patients, loss of appetite in 60 patients (100%), loss of weight in 40 patients (66.7%).[Table 4]
|
Clinical signs |
Number (n=60) |
Percentage |
|
1. Stony dullness |
60 |
100 |
|
2. Absent breath sound |
50 |
83.3 |
|
3. Decreased VF/VR |
52 |
86.7 |
|
4. Mediastinal shift |
50 |
83.3 |
|
5. Pleural rub |
4 |
6.6 |
|
6. Crepitations |
5 |
8.3 |
Stony dullness in 60 patients (100%), Decreased / absent breath sounds in 50 patients (83.3%), Mediastinal shift in 33 patients (83.3%), Decreased VF/VR in 52 patients (86.7%), Pleural rub in 4 patients (6.6%), Crepitations in 5 patients (8.3%).[Table 5]
|
Side of effusion |
Number ( n=60) |
Percentage |
|
Right |
36 |
60.0 |
|
Left |
19 |
31.7 |
|
Bilateral |
5 |
8.3 |
Out of 60 patients, 36 had right sided effusion, 19 had left sided effusion, 5 patients had bilateral pleural effusion.[Table 6]
|
Sputum AFB |
Total |
P value |
|
|
N |
% |
||
|
Negative |
28 |
46.7 |
0.232 |
|
Positive |
32 |
53.3 |
|
|
Total |
60 |
100.0 |
In the study group of 60 patients, sputum AFB was positive in 32 (53.3%) patients and 28 (53.3%) patients had sputum AFB was negative.[Table 7]
|
Cytology |
Total |
p value |
|
|
N |
% |
||
|
Lymphocytes + Mesothelial cells |
3 |
5.0 |
0.476 |
|
Predominantly lymphocytes |
42 |
70.0 |
|
|
Predominantly neutrophils |
15 |
25.0 |
|
|
Total |
60 |
100.0 |
Out of 60 patients, 3 patients had lymphocytes plus mesothelial cells, 42 patients had predominantly lymphocytes and 15 patients had predominantly neutrophils.[Table 8]
|
Pleural Protein (gram/dl) |
Number (n=60) |
|
1-2 |
6 |
|
2-4 |
16 |
|
4-6 |
34 |
|
>6 |
4 |
|
Total |
60 |
The above table shows the values of pleural protein. 6 patients had pleural protein values ranging from 1-2 gram/dl, 16 patients of pleural protein ranging from 2-4 gram/dl, 34 patients ranging from 4-6 gram/dl and 4 patients had protein levels above 6 gram/dl.[Table 9]
|
Pleural Cholesterol |
Number (N=60) |
|
<45 mg/dl |
15 |
|
>45 mg/dl |
45 |
|
Total |
60 |
15 patients had pleural cholesterol levels less than 45 mg/dl and 45 patients had cholesterol level above 45 mg/dl.[Table 10]
|
Parameters |
Exudates |
Transudate |
P value |
||
|
|
Mean |
SD |
Mean |
SD |
|
|
Lights criteria (Transudate=14 Exudate=46) |
|||||
|
Serum Protein |
5.7 |
1.0 |
6.1 |
1.1 |
0.215 |
|
Pleural Protein (G/DL) |
4.7 |
1.0 |
2.4 |
0.9 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural Sugar |
68.2 |
40.1 |
126.7 |
75.9 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural Fluid Protein: Serum Protein |
0.8 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural cholesterol criteria(transudate=15 Exudate=45) |
|||||
|
Pleural cholesterol |
78.2 |
23.7 |
21.9 |
9.2 |
<0.001* |
Note: * significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05).
The p value of serum protein is 0.215, pleural protein is <0.001, pleural sugar is <0.001, pleural cholesterol is <0.001, pleural fluid protein: serum protein is <0.001. P value of <0.001 is statistically significant.[Table 11]
|
|
According to pleural fluid cholesterol criteria (N=60) |
According to lights criteria (N=60) |
P value |
||
|
|
N |
% |
N |
% |
|
|
Exudate |
45 |
75.0 |
46 |
76.66 |
<0.001* |
|
Transudate |
15 |
25.0 |
14 |
23.33 |
|
|
Total |
60 |
100.0 |
60 |
100.0 |
Note: * significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05)
Based on lights criteria 46 patients were exudate and 14 patients were transudative pleural effusion, based on cholesterol criteria 45 patients were exudative and 15 were transudative pleural effusion.[Table 12]
The p value is < 0.001 which is statistically significant.
|
TP (true positive) |
45 |
|
FN (false negative) |
1 |
|
FP (false positive) |
0 |
|
TN (true negative) |
14 |
|
Sensitivity |
97.8% |
|
Specificity |
100.0% |
|
PPV(positive predictive value) |
100.0% |
|
NPV(negative predictive value) |
93.3% |
|
Accuracy |
98.3% |
|
Parameters |
Exudates |
Transudate |
P value |
||
|
|
Mean |
SD |
Mean |
SD |
|
|
Lights criteria (Transudate=14 Exudate=46) |
|||||
|
Serum Protein |
5.7 |
1.0 |
6.1 |
1.1 |
0.215 |
|
Pleural Protein (G/DL) |
4.7 |
1.0 |
2.4 |
0.9 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural sugar |
68.2 |
40.1 |
126.7 |
75.9 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural fluid protein:serum protein |
0.8 |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.1 |
<0.001* |
|
Pleural cholesterol criteria (Transudate=15 Exudate=45) |
|||||
|
Pleural cholesterol |
78.2 |
23.7 |
21.9 |
9.2 |
<0.001* |
According to Lights Criteria, the mean serum protein is 5.7±1.0 in exudates and 6.1±1.1 has p value of 0.215. The mean pleural protein is 4.7±1.0 in exudates and 2.4±0.9 has p value of 0.001. The mean pleural sugar is 68.2±40.1 in exudates and 126.7±75.9 has p value of 0.001.The mean pleural protein: serum protein is 0.8±0.2 in exudates and 0.3± 0.1 has p value of 0.001. According to pleural cholesterol criteria, the mean pleural cholesterol is 78.2±23.7 in exudates and 21.9±9.2 and has p value of 0.001 which is statistically significant.[Table 14]
Pleural fluid cholesterol
|
S.No |
Authors |
Sensitivity |
Specificity |
PPV |
NPV |
Accuracy |
|
1 |
Hamm [4] |
93.5 |
100 |
100 |
91 |
96 |
|
2 |
Valdes |
92.5 |
87.6 |
95 |
80 |
91.3 |
|
3 |
Ram |
96 |
93 |
96 |
92.6 |
95 |
|
4 |
B N Mohaptra |
92 |
100 |
100 |
99 |
93 |
|
5 |
Burgess |
54 |
92.2 |
87.3 |
50 |
66 |
|
6 |
Present study |
97.8 |
100 |
100 |
93.3 |
98.3 |
Discussion
A total of 60 patients were taken up for this study. Out of 60, 46 were exudates and 14 were transudates. Among 46 exudates, 40 were tubercular effusions, 5 patients were synpneumonic effusion and 1 patient with malignant effusion.
Among 14 transudative, 7 patients were congestive cardiac failure, 7 patients were cirrhosis.
Age and sex
The age of the patient in this study ranged from 18 years to 75 years. 1 patient was 18 years, 9 patients were between 21-30 years, 15 patients were between 31-40 years, 15 patients were between 41-50 years, 13 patients were between 51-60 years and 7 patients were above 60 years. Out of 60 patients, males were 38 and females were 22.
Presenting symptoms
Cough was present in 50 patients (83.3%), fever in 22 patients (36.7%), chest pain in 34 patients (56.7%), dyspnoea in 47 (78.3%), swelling of limbs and abdominal distension each in 10 patients (16.7%), facial puffiness in 6 patients, loss of appetite in 60 patients (100%), loss of weight in 40 patients (66.7%).
Signs
Mediastinal shift is seen in 50 patients opposite to the pleural effusion. Over affected side of chest, fullness of chest in 48 patients, decreased chest movements in 50 patients, expansion of chest reduced in 50 patients, decreased vocal fremitus in 52 patients, stony dullness in 60 patients, absent breath sounds in 50 patients, decreased vocal resonance in 52 patients, pleural rub in 4 patients and Crepitations in 5 patients.
Side of pleural effusion
Out of 60 patients, 36 had right side effusion, 19 had left side effusion, and 5 patients had bilateral pleural effusion.
Sputum AFB analysis
In the study group of 60 patients, sputum AFB was positive in 32 (53.3%) patients and 28 (53.3%) patients had sputum AFB was negative.
Colour of pleural effusion distribution
Colour of pleural effusion 36 patients had amber colour, 18 patients had clear fluid, 4 patients had haemorrhagic and straw colour in 2 patients.
Cytology of pleural effusion
Out of 60 patients, 3 patients had predominantly lymphocytes plus mesothelial cells, 42 patients had predominantly lymphocytes and 15 patients had predominantly neutrophils.
USG analysis
In the study group of 60 patients, cirrhosis was present in 7 patients, hepatomegaly in 1 patient, ascites in 1 patient, and normal in 39 patients.
Biochemical analysis of pleural effusion
Hammfirst used pleural cholesterol as a parameter. In his study of 150 patients he found excellent results (Sensitivity 93%, Specificity 100%, Accuracy 96%). Following Hamm’s, [5] Valdes [6] aimed to validate this parameter. In his study of 74 patients pleural cholesterol had good resultsas shown in the above table. Similar results were obtained from studies by Ram[7] in 100 patients and B N Mohaptra [8] in his study of 132 patients. The studies of Burgess and Remeroof 124 patients, results were in favour of lights criteria but they had less sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. As a result the present study of 60 patients which contains Pleural Cholesterol criteria has more sensitivity, specificity and accuracy when compared to other studies done by Burgess [9] and Remero[4] which contains Lights criteria. The study shows that pleural fluid cholesterol criteria (cholesterol >45 mg/dl - exudate and cholesterol <45 mg/dl – transudate) constitute a useful tool for the separation of pleural effusions.
Conclusion
The pleural fluid cholesterol criteria were found to be the most efficient criteria.
Since this parameter involves the measurement of only pleural fluid values of cholesterol, it has following advantages
Economically, it reduces number of biochemical tests
Simpler, as there is no need to take simultaneous blood sample at the time of thoracocentesis.
It is concluded that the determination of pleural fluid cholesterol criteria can be included in routine analysis of pleural fluid samples in place of presently used Lights Criteria.
Summary
This was a cross sectional descriptive study of 60 cases of pleural effusion. The parameter pleural fluid cholesterol levels are used in comparison with Lights criteria to distinguishing transudative and exudative pleural effusion. The following results were obtained in the present study.
True positive in 45 cases
False negative 1 case
False positive 0 case
True negative 14 case
Sensitivity 97 8%
Specificity 100%
Positive predictive value 100%
Negative predictive value 93 3%
Accuracy 98 3%
Source of Funding
No financial support was received for the work within this manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
- DD Dorey, R A Defronzo, E Ferrannini. Pleural effusion- A Diagnostic dilemma. JAMA 1976. [Google Scholar]
- E Hampson, D Chisholm, X Pi-Sunyer. Complications of Pleural effusion .Needle biopsy of parietal pleura in the diagnosis of pleural effusion. Q J Med 1961. [Google Scholar]
- R Light. Approach to Management of Pleural effusion. Ann Int Med 1966. [Google Scholar]
- H Hamm, JD Tobin, R Andres. Cholesterol in pleural effusion- A diagnostic aid. Chest 1987. [Google Scholar]
- F K Paddock, Z Keen. The relationship between the specific gravity and the protein content in human serous effusions. Am J Med Sci 1941. [Google Scholar]
- C E Leuallen, K L Zii. Pleural effusion. A statistical study of 436 patients. NEJM 1955. [Google Scholar]
- DT Carr, H M Giles, W H Giles. Dietz WHClinical value of measurement of protein in pleural fluid. NEJM 1958. [Google Scholar]
- J Chandrasekhar, N Vikram. Pleural effusion LDH activity and protein content its value in diagnosis. Arch NT Med 1969. [Google Scholar]
- R W Light, A Candela, L Hernandez. Pleural Effusions: The Diagnostic Separation of Transudates and Exudates. Ann Int Med 1972. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- Introduction
- Objective of the study
- Materials and Methods
- Method of collection of data
- Results and Observation
- Discussion
- Age and sex
- Presenting symptoms
- Signs
- Side of pleural effusion
- Sputum AFB analysis
- Colour of pleural effusion distribution
- Cytology of pleural effusion
- USG analysis
- Biochemical analysis of pleural effusion
- Conclusion
- Summary
- Source of Funding
- Conflict of Interest