Wei Yuqing, Shen Kaikai, Lv Tangfeng, Liu Hongbing, Wang Zimu, Wu Juan, Zhang He, Colella Sara, Wu Fu-Zong, Milano Michael T, Zhan Ping, Song Yong, Lu Zhiwei
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Yijishan Hospital of Wannan Medical College, Wuhu 241000, China.
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Jinling Hospital, Nanjing University School of Medicine, Nanjing 210002, China.
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Jun;9(3):446-458. doi: 10.21037/tlcr.2020.03.28.
Exudative pleural effusion (EPE) is a common diagnostic challenge. The utility of medical thoracoscopy (MT) and closed pleural biopsy (CPB) to aid in the diagnosis of EPE has been reported in many published studies. Herein, we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic yield and safety of CPB and MT in EPE.
Four databases were searched for studies reporting the diagnostic yield of CPB and MT for EPE. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS) tool. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and complication risks were compared between the two groups.
Ten studies dealing with CPB and twenty-three studies dealing with MT for the diagnosis of EPE were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR of CPB group was 77%, 99%, 32.55, 0.22, 165.71, respectively, while pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR of MT group was 93%, 100%, 10.82, 0.08, 162.81, respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve of CPB and MT were both 0.97. The ability of CPB to diagnose non-malignant diseases was like MT (69% . 68%), while the ability was lower than that of MT to diagnose malignant diseases (72% . 92%). The pooled diagnostic accuracy of CPB and MT for mesothelioma was 26% (95% CI, 14-38%) and 42% (95% CI, 22-62%) (P<0.001), respectively. The rate of complications with CBP was lower than that reported for MT.
CBP is a relatively accurate tool with a lower complication rate compared to MT in the diagnosis of EPE, especially in diagnosing non-malignant diseases. We confirm the utility of MT in the diagnostic workup of malignancy (especially mesothelioma); however, in selected cases, CPB could be used as the first diagnostic approach with a favorable safety profile.
渗出性胸腔积液(EPE)是一种常见的诊断难题。许多已发表的研究报告了内科胸腔镜检查(MT)和闭式胸膜活检(CPB)在辅助诊断EPE方面的效用。在此,我们进行一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较CPB和MT在EPE诊断中的诊断率和安全性。
检索四个数据库,查找报告CPB和MT对EPE诊断率的研究。根据诊断准确性研究质量评估(QUADAS)工具评估纳入研究的质量。比较两组之间的合并敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比(PLR)、阴性似然比(NLR)、诊断比值比(DOR)和并发症风险。
本荟萃分析纳入了10项关于CPB诊断EPE的研究和23项关于MT诊断EPE的研究。CPB组的合并敏感性、特异性、PLR、NLR和DOR分别为77%、99%、32.55、0.22、165.71,而MT组的合并敏感性、特异性、PLR、NLR和DOR分别为93%、100%、10.82、0.08、162.81。CPB和MT的汇总受试者工作特征(SROC)曲线下面积均为0.97。CPB诊断非恶性疾病的能力与MT相似(69%对68%),而其诊断恶性疾病的能力低于MT(72%对92%)。CPB和MT对间皮瘤的汇总诊断准确性分别为26%(95%CI,14 - 38%)和42%(95%CI,22 - 62%)(P<0.001)。CBP的并发症发生率低于MT报告的发生率。
在EPE诊断中,与MT相比,CBP是一种相对准确且并发症发生率较低的工具,尤其是在诊断非恶性疾病方面。我们证实了MT在恶性肿瘤(尤其是间皮瘤)诊断检查中的效用;然而,在某些特定情况下,CPB可作为具有良好安全性的首选诊断方法。