Combined analysis of C-reactive protein in pleural fluid and serum is effective in the differential diagnosis of exudative pleural effusions.

BACKGROUND: Exudative pleural effusion (EPE) is one of the common pleural manifestations of various diseases. Differential diagnosis of EPE is imperative clinically as it identifies different causes of EPE, thereby, enabling effective treatments. Thoracoscopy is a useful tool for differential diagnosis of EPE; however, some patients refuse thoracoscopic examination due to its invasive nature. In addition, the specificity and sensitivity of existing routine tests of EPE are unsatisfactory. Therefore, there is a great need to establish an effective method for the differential diagnosis of EPE.

METHODS: This study was a single-institution retrospective analysis of diagnostic efficiency of C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) between March 2018 and September 2018. A total of 87 patients diagnosed with EPE were enrolled. All participants underwent diagnostic thoracentesis. The EPE was examined using biochemical, routine, microbiological, and cytological methods. Pathological cytology detection was necessary for those suspected of malignant PE. Benign PE originates in patients with pneumonia, empyema, and tuberculosis. The levels of CRP and PCT in EPE and serum were measured before treatment. Correlation analysis and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were conducted to determine the underlying relationship between levels of CRP and PCT, and for differential diagnosis.

RESULTS: The ROC analysis showed that the sensitivity and specificity for the analysis of pleural fluid CRP (p-CRP) were higher (cut-off: 17.55 pg/mL; sensitivity: 75.00%, specificity: 83.90%) than that of serum CRP (s-CRP, cut-off: 23.90 pg/mL; sensitivity: 71.00%, specificity: 80.4%) in the differential diagnosis for EPE. However, the analysis of pleural fluid PCT (p-PCT) and serum PCT (s-PCT) did not demonstrate correlations with EPE. Combined analysis of p-CRP (cut-off: 17.55 mg/dL) with s-CRP (cut-off: 23.9 pg/mL) showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (88.4%) in diagnosing infectious EPE.

CONCLUSIONS: The data support the close relationship between combined analysis of p-CRP with s-CRP and effective and accurate differential diagnosis of EPE, due to its higher sensitivity and specificity. However, as a highly sensitive marker for diagnosing bacterial infections, neither s-PCT nor p-PCT, showed correlations with the differential diagnosis of EPE.