Porcel J M, Peña J M, Vicente de Vera C, Esquerda A, Vives M, Light Richard W
Pleural Diseases Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, Avda Alcalde Rovira Roure 80, 25198 Lleida, Spain.
Respir Med. 2006 Nov;100(11):1960-5. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2006.02.025. Epub 2006 Apr 12.
To ascertain if equations that calculate continuous likelihood ratios (CLRs) for pleural exudates improve pleural fluid categorization, especially when false positive or false negative test results are obtained by using Light's criteria.
Retrospective review of the clinical and pleural fluid data from a consecutive series of patients with pleural effusion who underwent thoracentesis at the University Hospital Arnau de Vilanova (Lleida, Spain) over an 11-year period.
A total of 1490 patients with pleural effusion (298 transudates and 1192 exudates) were recruited into the study. The presence of a transudate or exudate was established by clinical judgment. We examined the comparative diagnostic accuracy of 4 tests (i.e. pleural fluid protein and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and pleural fluid to serum protein and LDH ratios) for discriminating between transudates and exudates. Decision thresholds were determined by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. Equations for calculating CLRs derived from a logistic regression analysis based on a previously described method.
Individual pleural fluid tests did not differ in their diagnostic accuracies according to ROC analysis. We calculated CLRs for the elements of Light's criteria and pleural fluid protein, and also illustrated the sequential use of CLRs for determining posttest probabilities. Overall, CLR formulas had marginal performance for the correct categorization of pleural fluid.
CLRs provide a probabilistic statement as to the likelihood an effusion is a transudate or exudate. However, clinical judgment is little changed by the application of CLRs, and in doubtful cases a great amount of uncertainty remains. This Bayesian approach is likely to have no major impact on the clinical practice.
确定用于计算胸腔积液连续似然比(CLRs)的公式是否能改善胸腔积液的分类,特别是在使用Light标准获得假阳性或假阴性检测结果时。
对11年间在西班牙莱里达省阿尔瑙·德·维拉诺瓦大学医院接受胸腔穿刺术的一系列连续性胸腔积液患者的临床和胸腔积液数据进行回顾性分析。
共纳入1490例胸腔积液患者(298例漏出液和1192例渗出液)。通过临床判断确定漏出液或渗出液的存在。我们检查了4项检测(即胸腔积液蛋白和乳酸脱氢酶(LDH),以及胸腔积液与血清蛋白和LDH比值)在区分漏出液和渗出液方面的比较诊断准确性。通过受试者操作特征(ROC)分析确定决策阈值。基于先前描述的方法,通过逻辑回归分析得出计算CLRs的公式。
根据ROC分析,各胸腔积液检测的诊断准确性无差异。我们计算了Light标准各要素和胸腔积液蛋白的CLRs,并说明了连续使用CLRs确定检验后概率的方法。总体而言,CLR公式在正确分类胸腔积液方面表现欠佳。
CLRs提供了关于胸腔积液是漏出液或渗出液可能性的概率性陈述。然而,CLRs的应用对临床判断影响不大,在可疑病例中仍存在大量不确定性。这种贝叶斯方法可能对临床实践没有重大影响。