Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 49-55

Value of C-reactive protein in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion


Department of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt

Date of Submission12-Jun-2016
Date of Acceptance13-Jul-2016
Date of Web Publication24-Jan-2017

Correspondence Address:
Sherif A.A. Mohamed
Department of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut 71516
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1687-8426.198999

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background Few studies had reported the value of C-reactive protein (CRP) in differentiating between tuberculous pleural effusion (TBPE) and malignant pleural effusion (MPE).
Aim The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of CRP in differentiating between TBPE and MPE.
Settings and design This prospective study was conducted in a University Hospital.
Patients and methods During a period of 18 months, a prospective study included 59 adult patients with pleural effusion. The study included two groups: group I, which included 29 patients with TBPE, and group II, which included 30 patients with MPE. Serum C-reactive protein (s-CRP) and pleural fluid C-reactive protein (p-CRP) were measured and compared in both groups, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.
Results The mean values of s-CRP were 28.34±14.41 and 27.87±13.21 mg/dl in TBPE and MPE, respectively, with no significant difference. The mean values of p-CRP were 36.51±3.91 and 26.39±7.57 mg/dl in TBPE and MPE, respectively, with a highly significant difference (P=0.001). There were significantly positive correlations between s-CRP and p-CRP in both TBPE and MPE (r=0.685 and P=0.001; r=0.594 and P=0.006, respectively). With the use of cutoff values of 31.6 and 43.3 mg/l for p-CRP and s-CRP, sensitivity and specificity were 89.47 and 80.00% for p-CRP, and 15.79 and 100.00%, respectively, for s-CRP. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of p-CRP was 0.888, superior to that of s-CRP (0.525).
Conclusion Measurement of CRP levels in the pleural fluid has a good utility in the diagnostic workup of patients with pleural effusion. p-CRP can be a useful adjunctive test, as a potential differentiator between TBPE and MPE.

Keywords: C-reactive protein, differentiation, malignant, pleural effusion, tuberculosis, value


How to cite this article:
Mohamed SA, Agmy GR, Wafy SM, Abd El-Hameed MG. Value of C-reactive protein in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion. Egypt J Bronchol 2017;11:49-55

How to cite this URL:
Mohamed SA, Agmy GR, Wafy SM, Abd El-Hameed MG. Value of C-reactive protein in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion. Egypt J Bronchol [serial online] 2017 [cited 2024 Mar 29];11:49-55. Available from: http://www.ejbronchology.eg.net/text.asp?2017/11/1/49/198999


  Introduction Top


Diagnosis and management of pleural effusions remain a challenge because the catalog of the diseases they cause is as big as it is diverse. The dilemma is in differentiating transudative from exudative effusions. However, the more important dilemma in the diagnosis of exudative effusions is to differentiate benign from malignant effusions, which is very important as they have different outcome and management [1]. Although cytological examination of the pleural fluid is an easy way to diagnose a pleural malignancy, a false-negative rate of about 40% has been reported [2]; therefore, there is an increasing demand for markers that may help in this differentiation.

C-reactive protein (CRP) was discovered in 1930 and is widely used as a sensitive, but nonspecific, marker of systemic inflammation [3]. The induction of CRP synthesis is triggered by a number of cytokines, which are released in the inflammatory region, chiefly the pyrogenic cytokine, interleukin-6, which is released mainly from macrophages and monocytes [4]. Increased serum C-reactive protein (s-CRP) levels have been reported in many pulmonary disorders, including pneumonia, malignancies, and pulmonary thromboembolism [5]. Some studies had investigated the value of CRP in the diagnosis of pleural effusion [6],[7],[8]. However, few studies had reported the value of CRP in the differentiation between tuberculous pleural effusion (TBPE) and malignant pleural effusion (MPE) [9],[10]. The aim of the current study was to investigate the diagnostic value of CRP in the differentiation between TBPE and MPE.


  Patients and methods Top


Study population

This study was conducted prospectively at the Department of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis, Assiut University Hospital, from April 2013 to October 2014. The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University. It included adult patients who were admitted with the preliminary diagnosis of exudative pleural effusion. Thereafter, the patients were classified according to their final diagnosis into two groups: group I included patients with TBPE, and group II included patients with MPE.

All patients were subjected to the following:

  1. Full medical history and clinical examination.
  2. Routine laboratory investigations (e.g. blood urea and serum creatinine, liver functions, especially albumin, and collagen profile, as needed).
  3. Radiological examination: Plain chest radiograph posteroanterior and lateral views, and chest ultrasonography. Whenever needed, computed tomography scan of the chest, abdominal ultrasonography, and echocardiography were performed.
  4. Tuberculin skin testing, in cases of suspected tuberculous pleurisy.
  5. Sputum examination for acid fast, alcohol fast bacilli with Ziehl–Neelsen stain on 3 successive days.
  6. Sputum cytology was studied for the detection of malignant cells.
  7. Diagnostic thoracocentesis: collection and processing of the pleural fluid samples (about 300–500 ml) were carried out and subjected to the following examinations:

    1. Physical examination.
    2. Chemical examination, including protein level, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, total and differential cell count, and adenosine deaminase level when tuberculous effusion is suspected.
    3. Bacteriological examination.
    4. Cytological examination for malignant cells.
    5. Quantitative measurement of pleural fluid C-reactive protein (p-CRP).
  8. Pleural biopsy: sonographic-guided closed pleural biopsy using either Cope’s or Abram’s needle pleural biopsy.
  9. Collection of 3 ml of venous blood for quantitative measurement of s-CRP.


There were no reported major complications during the period of research, and all patients provided informed written consent.

Diagnostic criteria for pleural effusions

An exudative pleural effusion was defined, according to Light’s criteria [11], by one or more of following: (a) ratio of LDH in the pleural fluid to that in the serum of more than 0.6; (b) ratio of total protein in the pleural fluid to that in the serum of more than 0.5; and (c) pleural effusion LDH level greater than two-thirds the upper limit of the laboratory’s reference range of serum LDH.

The diagnosis of tuberculous pleurisy was suggested upon high tuberculin positivity, lymphocytic pleural fluid, few mesothelial cells, and elevated adenosine deaminase level in pleural fluid, and was confirmed with the presence of positive stain for Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the pleural fluid, sputum, or pleural biopsy, or the presence of caseating granuloma in the pleural biopsy.

MPE was defined as malignant cells detected on cytological examination of the effusion or pleural biopsy.

Exclusion criteria

  1. Transudative pleural effusion.
  2. Being under chemotherapy or radiotherapy.
  3. Empyema.
  4. Immunocompromised patients.
  5. Contraindication for thoracocentesis (e.g. patient is confused or in a bad general condition).
  6. Inadequate amount of effusion drained for diagnostic procedures.


Ultrasound-guided closed pleural biopsy

A real-time ultrasound scanner (Aloka Prosound SSD 3500SV, ALOKA Co., Ltd., Mitaka-shi, Tokyo, Japan) was used. Cope’s closed pleural biopsy needle was used, which contains an outer needle 11 G with an adjustable needle stop, and an inner 13 G biopsy trocar (hook-shaped) for pleural biopsy sample collection. All biopsies were placed in 10% formalin and sent to the pathologist for histopathological examination.

Measurement of C-reactive protein

s-CRP and p-CRP concentrations were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit supplied by Chemux Bio Science (San Francisco, California, USA).

Statistical analysis

All statistical analyses of differences between TBPE and MPE were performed using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Spearman’s correlations were used to determine the relationships between p-CRP and s-CRP. The diagnostic accuracies of p-CRP and s-CRP in discriminating between TBPE and MPE were compared by constructing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The optimum cutoff point from the ROC analysis was established by selecting the value that provides the greatest sum of sensitivity and specificity. Data were analyzed using the statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) software (version 16; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Statistical significance was defined as P less than 0.05.


  Results Top


Demographic data

During the study period, 59 adult patients with exudative pleural effusion were enrolled. These patients were classified according to their final diagnosis into two groups. Group I included 29 patients with TBPE, of whom 19 (66%) were male and 10 (34%) were female. Their ages ranged from 17 to 62 years, with the mean age of 34 years. Group II included 30 patients with MPE, of whom 18 (60%) were male and 12 (40%) were female. Their ages ranged from 35 to 70 years with the mean age of 57 years. This group comprised 10 female patients with metastatic breast cancer, 12 secondary to bronchogenic carcinoma (were diagnosed by means of bronchoscopic biopsy), three male patients with malignant mesothelioma, and five patients with metastatic carcinoma (renal, colon, gastric, and ovarian). [Table 1] shows the demographic data, sonographic findings, and cytological findings of the studied groups.
Table 1 Demographic data, sonographic findings, and cytological findings of the studied groups

Click here to view


Serum C-reactive protein and pleural C-reactive protein levels

Levels of s-CRP and p-CRP in the two studied groups are shown in [Table 2]. s-CRP levels ranged from 2.3 to 45.3 mg/dl, with a mean value of 28.34±14.41 mg/dl in TBPE, whereas it ranged from 3.8 to 43.3 mg/dl, with a mean of 27.87±13.21 mg/dl in MPE. No significant difference was found in the s-CRP levels between the two patient groups (P=0.916). p-CRP levels ranged from 30.2 to 43.5 mg/dl, with a mean value of 36.51±3.91 mg/dl in TBPE, whereas it ranged from 13.8 to 44.0 mg/dl, with a mean of 26.39±7.57 mg/dl in MPE. A highly significant difference (P=0.001) was found in the p-CRP levels between the two patient groups. [Table 2] shows these data.
Table 2 Serum and pleural fluid C-reactive protein levels among studied groups

Click here to view


Correlation between serum C-reactive protein and pleural C-reactive protein

[Figure 2] demonstrate the correlation between s-CRP and p-CRP in the two studied groups. There were significantly positive correlations between s-CRP and p-CRP levels in both patients with TBPE (Spearman’s coefficient of correlation; r=0.685 and P=0.001) and patients with MPE (Spearman’s coefficient of correlation; r=0.594 and P=0.006) ([Figure 1] and [Figure 2]).
Figure 1 Correlation between serum and pleural C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in tuberculous pleural effusion. *Highly significant.

Click here to view
Figure 2 Correlation between serum and pleural C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in malignant pleural effusion. *Highly significant.

Click here to view


Diagnostic values of C-reactive protein

To evaluate whether p-CRP and s-CRP levels could discriminate between TBPE and MPE, cutoff values were determined by the maximum sum of sensitivity and specificity. We used cutoff values of 31.6 and 43.3 mg/l for p-CRP and s-CRP, respectively, yielding sensitivity and specificity values of 89.47 and 80.00% for p-CRP, and 15.79 and 100.00% for s-CRP, respectively. The ROC curves of p-CRP and s-CRP for distinguishing TBPE from MPE are shown in [Figure 3] and [Figure 4]. We found that the area under the ROC curve of ROC curves (diagnostic accuracy) of p-CRP (0.888) was superior to that of s-CRP (0.525).
Figure 3 Diagnostic accuracy of pleural C-reactive protein (CRP) in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion.

Click here to view
Figure 4 Diagnostic accuracy of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion.

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


The diagnosis of pleural effusion is a difficult challenge because the catalog of the diseases they cause is as big as it is diverse, and in most cases of pleural effusions data are not pathognomonic. The more frequent dilemma in the diagnosis of exudative pleural effusions is differentiating MPEs from inflammatory nonmalignant one [1]. Moreover, the conventional cytological examination of pleural fluids for differentiating benign from MPE is of limited diagnostic accuracy [1],[2].

In a living organism, a biochemical, physiological, and immunological reaction cascade is produced as a response to chemical, physical, and immunological stimuli, infectious agents, and malignancies. This reaction is known as the acute-phase response [12].

CRP was discovered in 1930 and is widely used as a sensitive, but nonspecific, marker of systemic inflammation [3]. Plasma CRP is produced only by hepatocytes, predominantly under transcriptional control by the cytokine interleukin-6, although other sites of local CRP synthesis and possibly secretion have been suggested [13]. The plasma half-life of CRP is about 19 h and is constant under all conditions of health and disease, and hence the sole determinant of circulating CRP concentration is the synthesis rate, which thus directly reflects the intensity of the pathological process(es) stimulating CRP production [14].

In most diseases, the circulating value of CRP reflects ongoing inflammation and/or tissue damage much more accurately than do other laboratory parameters of the acute-phase response, such as plasma viscosity and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate. Importantly, acute-phase CRP values show no diurnal variation. Hepatic failure impairs CRP production, and very few drugs reduce CRP values unless they also affect the underlying pathology providing the acute-phase stimulus. Thus, the CRP concentration is a very useful nonspecific biochemical marker of inflammation [13],[14]. Increased s-CRP levels have been reported in many pulmonary disorders, including pneumonia, malignancies, and pulmonary thromboembolism [5].

The current study was conducted prospectively to investigate the value of CRP in differentiating between TBPE and MPE.

Our results revealed that the mean value of s-CRP in MPE is lower than that in TBPE, but this difference did not reach a statistical significance. However, p-CRP values were significantly lower in MPE in comparison with TBPE. These findings are in agreement with previous reports [7],[8],[9],[10].

Chierakul et al. [9] in their study of 161 patients with pleural effusion found that p-CRP and s-CRP levels were significantly higher in patients with tuberculous effusion in comparison with those with malignant effusion. They concluded that, in patients presenting with lymphocytic exudative pleural effusion, a simple marker of elevated p-CRP level may be helpful in discriminating between TBPE and MPE [9]. Garcia-Pachon et al. [15], in their evaluation of 144 patients with lymphocytic pleural effusion, observed that p-CRP level was higher in tuberculous pleurisy than in lymphocytic effusion of other origins. The authors concluded that CRP pleural fluid determination is useful in the diagnostic workup of lymphocytic pleural effusions. High CRP levels are very suggestive of tuberculous pleuritis and low CRP levels make this diagnosis unlikely [15].

We reported a significant difference between the mean values of p-CRP of 36.51±3.91 and 26.39±7.57 mg/dl in TBPE and MPE, respectively. Sedky et al. [10] found a highly significant difference in p-CRP between tuberculous (29.07±9.32 mg/dl) and malignant (19.30±4.35 mg/dl) effusions. They concluded that CRP is a useful and cheap marker for differentiating between TBPE and MPE.

Our data demonstrated significant correlations between serum and pleural fluid levels of CRP in both patients with tuberculous and those with malignant effusion.

This finding is in agreement with that of Park et al. [16], who studied the CRP levels in 80 patients with MPE and 68 patients with benign effusions and found that p-CRP levels correlated with s-CRP levels (r=0.82 and P<0.0001).

In our data, more significant correlation was encountered in patients with TBPE than in those with MPE (P=0.001 vs. 0.006, respectively). This could be attributed to higher p-CRP values in nonmalignant effusions that reflect a higher local production of p-CRP in response to a higher degree of inflammation, granuloma formation, and increased vascular permeability of the pleura in patients with tuberculous pleurisy [1],[17].

In contrast, the reasons for CRP elevation in cancer patients are not completely understood. One possible explanation is as follows: due to cytokine production by tumor tissue, elevated CRP values may indicate a higher tumor burden [18]. Scott et al. [19] reported a catabolic effect of acute-phase proteins such as CRP on metabolism, and this is associated with an increase in resting energy expenditure and loss of lean tissue in patients with lung cancer, key factors in determining cancer survival.

In the current work, we used cutoff values of 31.6 and 43.3 mg/l for p-CRP and s-CRP, respectively, which yielded sensitivity and specificity values of 89.47 and 80.00% for p-CRP, and 15.79 and 100.00% for s-CRP, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of p-CRP was 0.888, and was superior to that of s-CRP (0.525). These findings are in accordance with those of previous reports [16],[20],[21].

Park et al. [16] observed that the diagnostic accuracy of p-CRP for distinguishing lung cancer with MPE from benign pleural effusion was 0.86, and superior to that of s-CRP (0.77). Botana-Rial et al. [20] reported that the diagnostic accuracies of p-CRP and s-CRP for differentiating MPE from benign pleural effusion were 0.752 and 0.667, respectively.

In a study on 97 patients with pleural effusion, Turay et al. [21] compared CRP levels between transudates and exudates, and between inflammatory effusions and other types. They found that p-CRP levels greater than 30 mg/l had a sensitivity of 93.7% and a specificity of 76.5% for inflammatory pleural effusions.

In an Egyptian experience, El-Shimy et al. [8] studied the value of CRP levels among 54 patients with pleural effusions of different etiologies (eight transudative, 14 parapneumonic, 14 tuberculous, and 18 malignant effusion). p-CRP levels ranged from 2.1 to 16 mg/dl (mean: 6.992±3.727 mg/dl) in tuberculous effusion and ranged from 1.01 to 6.8 mg/dl (mean: 2.491±1.69 mg/dl) in malignant effusion. s-CRP level was significantly higher in patients with tuberculous effusion (14.110±3.62 mg/dl) than in those with malignant effusion (6.450±2.240 mg/dl) (P<0.001). p-CRP level was significantly lower in patients with malignant effusion (2.491±1.69 mg/dl) than in patients with tuberculous effusion (6.992±3.727 mg/dl) (P=0.002). Interestingly, the used cutoff values for CRP were different among different studies. Samaha et al. (7) studied CRP levels in both infectious and MPEs and showed that, at a cutoff value of 96.15 µg/ml for CRP, diagnostic sensitivity was 61% and specificity was 45%. Porcel [2] differentiated TBPE from MPE when CRP levels in pleural fluid were greater than 20 mg/l. Ji et al. [22] could differentiate between TBPE from MPE with p-CRP levels of 30 versus 18 mg/l, respectively, whereas Kapisyzi et al. [1] showed that p-CRP levels less than 20 mg/l are a strong indicator against an infectious pleural effusion, whether of bacterial or mycobacterial nature. These differences among studies could be attributed to different population demographics, numbers, laboratory assessment, and statistical analysis.

To summarize, our data are in agreement with previous studies reporting the importance of CRP in the diagnostic workup of pleural effusion, and, particularly, in differentiating tuberculous from malignant exudative pleural effusions. CRP is a relatively simple, rapid, and inexpensive test in the hands of the clinician, especially in the setting of developing countries.

In the view of our daily clinical practice, Kapisyzi et al. [1], in their review of the literature, concluded that CRP is very useful as a diagnostic aid in tuberculous pleuritis, wherein low p-CRP levels (<30 mg/l) make this diagnosis unlikely. Considering these results, measuring CRP in pleural effusion has to be a routine examination of pleural effusions because it gives a broad information to following dilemma: inflammatory origin or non inflammatory one, subacute or chronic inflammation [1].

The current study has a possible limitation − that is, the relatively low number of enrolled patients. Further studies with more enrolled participants are warranted.





Measurement of CRP levels in the pleural fluid has a good utility in the diagnostic workup of patients with pleural effusion. p-CRP can be a useful adjunctive test, as a potential differentiator between TBPE and MPE.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the team of the Department of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, for their contribution to the laboratory work of this study.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Kapisyzi P, Dikensoy Ö, Argjiri D. Acute inflammation biomarkers in pleural effusions. Derleme 2012; 13:53–55.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Porcel JM. Pearls and myths in pleural fluid analysis. Respirology 2011; 16:44–52.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Pepys MB, Hirschfield GM. C-reactive protein: a critical update. J Clin Invest 2003; 111:1805–1812.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Gabay C, Kushner I. Acute-phase proteins and other systemic responses to inflammation. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:448–454.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Smith RP, Lipworth BJ. C-reactive protein in simple community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 1995; 107:1028–1031.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Abu-Youssef H, Amin S, Amin H, Osman E. Value of C-reactive protein in etiologic diagnosis of pleural effusion. Egypt J Bronchol 2010; 4:124–130.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Samaha HMS, Elsaid AR, Elzehery R, Elhelaly R. C-reactive protein and serum amyloid A levels in discriminating malignant from non-malignant pleural effusion. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc 2015; 64:887–892.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
El-Shimy WS, Attia GA, Hazzaa SM, Mansour YM, Abd El-Halim WM. Diagnostic value of procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in differentiation between some benign and malignant pleural effusions. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc 2014; 63:923–930.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Chierakul N, Kanitsap A, Chaiprasert A, Viriyataveekul R. A simple C-reactive protein measurement for the differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion. Respirology 2004; 9:66–69.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Sedky M, Radwan I, Mohamed M. C-reactive protein in differentiation between tuberculous and malignant pleural effusions. Eur Respir J 2011; 38:2715.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Light RW. Clinical practice. Pleural effusion. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:1971–1977.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Steel DM, Whitehead AS. The major acute phase reactants: C-reactive protein, serum amyloid P component and serum amyloid A protein. Immunol Today 1994; 15:81–88.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Pepys MB, Baltz ML. Acute phase proteins with special reference to C-reactive protein and related proteins (pentaxins) and serum amyloid A protein. Adv Immunol 1983; 34:141–212.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Vigushin DM, Pepys MB, Hawkins PN. Metabolic and scintigraphic studies of radioiodinated human C-reactive protein in health and disease. J Clin Invest 1993; 91:1351–1357.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Garcia-Pachon E, Soler MJ, Padilla-Navas I, Romero V, Shum C. C-reactive protein in lymphocytic pleural effusions: a diagnostic aid in tuberculous pleuritis. Respiration 2005; 72:486–489.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Park DS, Kim D, Hwang KE, Hwang YR, Park C, Seol CH et al. Diagnostic value and prognostic significance of pleural C-reactive protein in lung cancer patients with malignant pleural effusions. Yonsei Med J 2013; 54:396–402.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Elsammak MMY, Morsi TS, Khamis HI, Ragab MS, Zaki MA, Abdel-Hadi M, Hassan HA. Osteopontin and C-reactive protein in Egyptian patients affected with tuberculous and malignant pleural effusion. Ann Clin Biochem 2007; 44(Pt 3):264–272.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Heikkilä K, Ebrahim S, Lawlor DA. A systematic review of the association between circulating concentrations of C reactive protein and cancer. J Epidemiol Community Health 2007; 61: 824–833.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Scott HR, McMillan DC, Forrest LM, Brown DJ, McArdle CS, Milroy R. The systemic inflammatory response, weight loss, performance status and survival in patients with inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer 2002; 87:264–267.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Botana-Rial M, Casado-Rey P, Leiro-Fernández V, Andrade-Olivié M, Represas-Represas C, Fernández-Villar A. Validity of procalcitonin and C-reactive protein measurement when differentiating between benign and malignant pleural effusion. Clin Lab 2011; 57:373–378.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Turay YU, Yildirim Z, Turkoz Y, Biber C, Erdogan Y, Keyf AI et al. Use of pleural fluid C-reactive protein in diagnosis of pleural effusions. Respir Med 2000; 94:432–435.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Ji Q, Huang B, Wang M, Ren Z, Zhang S, Zhang Y et al. Pleural fluid prealbumin and C-reactive protein in the differential diagnosis of infectious and malignant pleural effusions. Exp Ther Med 2014; 7:778–784.  Back to cited text no. 22
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]


This article has been cited by
1 Diagnostic value of calprotectin in differentiation between benign and malignant pleural effusion
Omar M. Mohammed, Kamel M. Hussein, Abdelgawad E. Ramadan, Gouda T. Mahmoud, Marwa El-Sayed El-Naggar, Nor Eldein Z. Gaber
Egyptian Journal of Bronchology. 2019; 13(3): 382
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Patients and methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2489    
    Printed47    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded209    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]