The diagnostic utility of pleural fluid adenosine deaminase for tuberculosis in a low prevalence area

P. Sivakumar*, L. Marples, R. Breen, L. Ahmed

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    25 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: Pleural fluid adenosine deaminase (pfADA) is not routinely measured in patients with undiagnosed pleural effusion due to limited evidence of its diagnostic utility in areas of low tuberculosis (TB) prevalence. M E T H O D S : We conducted a retrospective consecutive case series analysis of all patients who underwent pfADA testing from 2009 to 2015 at a tertiary service pleural centre in south London. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, we identified the optimal threshold at which maximal sensitivity and specificity were achieved. Results: Of the 132 patients tested for pfADA, 27 had confirmed pleural TB and 105 did not, with median pfADA levels of respectively 63 IU/l (interquartile range [IQR] 47-88) and 12 IU/l (IQR 7.5-22.5). ROC curve analysis determined the optimal pfADA cut-off to be 30 IU/l, which had positive and negative predictive values of respectively 60.5% and 98.9%, 96.3% sensitivity (95%CI 0.892-1.000) and 83.8% specificity (95%CI 0.768- 0.909). The calculated area under the ROC curve was 0.934 (95%CI 0.893-0.975). Conclusion: A pfADA level ,30 IU/l makes a diagnosis of TB highly unlikely in the South London population. Its high sensitivity and negative predictive values make pfADA a valuable screening test for excluding suspected pleural TB.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)697-701
    Number of pages5
    JournalInternational Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
    Volume21
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017

    Keywords

    • London
    • Lymphocytic effusion
    • Pleural effusion

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The diagnostic utility of pleural fluid adenosine deaminase for tuberculosis in a low prevalence area'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this