SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2013 / Sayı: 4

Diagnostic Value of Carcinoembryonic Antigen and C-Reactive Protein Levels In The Discrimination Between Malignant Pleural Effusion and Parapneumonic Effusion

MALİGN VE PARAPNOMONİK EFÜZYON AYRIMINDA PLEVRAL SIVI CREAKTİF PROTEİN VE KARSİNOEMBRİYONİK ANTİJEN DÜZEYLERİNİN TANISAL DEĞERİ

Ömer AYTEN
Dilaver TAŞ
Osman Metin İPÇİOĞLU
Oğuzhan OKUTAN
Zafer KARTALOĞLU
Ersin DEMİRER
Pages
189–193
Publication Date
2013-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The high levels of CEA in patients with MPE were statistically significant p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: There are problems in the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion MPE and parapneumonic effusion PPE .
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with MPE and 21 patients with PPE were assessed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The high levels of CEA in patients with MPE were statistically significant p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:malignant pleural effusion · parapneumonic effusion · CEA

Abstract

Introduction: There are problems in the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion MPE and parapneumonic effusion PPE . We investigated the diagnostic value of levels of carcinoembryonic antigen CEA and C-reactive protein CRP in the discrimination of MPE and PPE. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with MPE and 21 patients with PPE were assessed. CEA and CRP levels were measured in the pleural fluids.Results: CEA levels in the pleural fluid were 55.03±102.96 ng/mL and 1.11±1.07 ng/mL 0.12-4.30 in patients with MPE and PPE, respectively. The high levels of CEA in patients with MPE were statistically significant p

Özet

Amaç: Biz bu çalışmamızda plevral sıvı karsinoembriyonik antijen CEA ve C – reaktif protein CRP seviyelerinin MPE ve PPE ayrımında ki tanısal değerini araştırdık Hastalar ve Yöntem:28 MPE ve 21 PPE hastası çalışmaya dahil edildi. Plevral sıvı CEA ve CRP seviyeleri ölçüldü. Bulgular: MPE ve PPE hastalarında plevral sıvı CEA seviyeleri sırasıyla 55.03±102.96 ng/mL 0.4-387 ve 1.11±1.07 ng/mL 0.12-4.30 ölçüldü. MPE hastalarında yüksek CEA seviyeleri istatistiksel olarak anlamlı idi p

🔖

Cite This Article

AYTEN, Ö., TAŞ, D., İPÇİOĞLU, O. M., OKUTAN, O., KARTALOĞLU, Z., DEMİRER, E. (2013). Diagnostic Value of Carcinoembryonic Antigen and C-Reactive Protein Levels In The Discrimination Between Malignant Pleural Effusion and Parapneumonic Effusion. Acıbadem Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Sayı: 4, 189–193. https://ajindex.com/articles/163242

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Light RW. Tumor Markers in Undiagnosed Pleural Effusions. Chest 2004, 126; 1721-1722.
  2. Wrightson JM, Davies RJ. The approach to the patient with a parapneumonic effusion Semin Respir Crit Care Med.2010; 31: 706-715.
  3. Koegelenberg CFN, Diacon AH, Bolliger CT. Parapneumonic pleural effusion and empyema. Respiration 2008; 75: 241-250.
  4. Gaspar MJ, De Miguel J, Garcia Diaz JD, Diez M. Clinical utility of a combination of tumor markers in the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions. Anticancer Res. 2008; 28: 2947-2952.
  5. Cobanoglu U, Sayir F, Mergan D. Reactive oxygen metabolites can be used to differantiate malignant and non-malignant pleural effusions. Ann Thorac Med. 2010; 5: 140-144.
  6. Kiropoulos TS, Kostikas K, Oikonomidi S, Tsilioni I, Nikoulis D, Germenis A, et al. Acute phase markers for the differentiation of infectious and malignant pleural effusions Respir Med. 2007; 101: 910-918.
  7. McGrath EE, Warriner D, Anderson PB. The use of non-routine pleural fluid analysis in the diagnosis of pleural effusion Respir Med. 2010; 104: 1092-1100.
  8. Boucher D, Cournoyer D, Stanners CP, Fuks A. Studies on the control of gene expression of the carcinoembryonic antigen family in human tissue. Cancer Res. 1989; 49: 847-852.
  9. Chen SC, Chen W, Hsu WH, Yu YH, Shih CM. Role of pleural fluid C-reactive protein concentration in discriminating uncomplicated parapneumonic pleural effusions from complicated parapneumonic effusion and empyema. Lung 2006; 184: 141-145.
  10. Porcel JM, Vives M, Cao G, Bielsa S, Ruiz-Gonzalez A, Martinez- Iribarren A, et al. Biomarkers of infection for the differential diagnosis of pleural effusions. Eur Respir J. 2009; 34: 1383-1389.
  11. Antony VB, Jantz MA. Primum non nocere and malignant pleural effusions. Respiration 2004; 71: 549-550.
  12. Na MJ, Dikensoy O, Light RW. New trends in the diagnosis and treatment in parapneumonic effusion and empyema. Tuberk Toraks 2008; 56: 113-120.
  13. Hwa Lee J, Chang JH. Diagnostic utility of serum and pleural fluid carcinoembryonic antigen, neuron- specific enolase, and cytokeratine 19 fragments in patients with effusions from primary lung cancer. Chest 2005;128:2298–2303.
  14. Porcel JM, Vives M, Esquerda A, Salud A, Perez B, Rodriguez-Panadero F. Use of a panel of tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, cancer antigen 125, carbohydrate antigen 15-3, and cytokeratin 19 fragments) in pleural fluid for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant effusions. Chest, 2004;126:1757-1763.
  15. Ferrer J, Villarino MA, Encabo G, Felip E, Bermejo B,