http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
( Larry Ellee Nyanti ),( Muhammad Aklil Abd Rahim ),( Nai-chien Huan ) 대한결핵 및 호흡기학회 2024 Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases Vol.87 No.1
Background: Tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) and parapneumonic effusion (PPE) are often difficult to differentiate owing to the overlapping clinical features. Observational studies demonstrate that the ratio of lactate dehydrogenase to adenosine deaminase (LDH/ADA) is lower in TPE compared to PPE, but integrated analysis is warranted. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the LDH/ADA ratio in differentiating TPE and PPE. We explored the PubMed and Scopus databases for studies evaluating the LDH/ADA ratio in differentiating TPE and PPE. Results: From a yield of 110 studies, five were included for systematic review. The cutoff value for the LDH/ADA ratio in TPE ranged from <14.2 to <25. The studies demonstrated high heterogeneity, precluding meta-analysis. Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Tool 2 assessment revealed a high risk of bias in terms of patient selection and index test. Conclusion: LDH/ADA ratio is a potentially useful parameter to differentiate between TPE and PPE. Based on the limited data, we recommend an LDH/ADA ratio cutoff value of <15 in differentiating TPE and PPE. However, more rigorous studies are needed to further validate this recommendation.
Larry Ellee Nyanti, M.R.C.P.I.,Muhammad Aklil Abd Rahim, Dr.P.H.,Nai-Chien Huan, M.R.C.P. 대한결핵및호흡기학회 2024 Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases Vol.87 No.1
Background: Tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) and parapneumonic effusion (PPE) areoften difficult to differentiate owing to the overlapping clinical features. Observationalstudies demonstrate that the ratio of lactate dehydrogenase to adenosine deaminase(LDH/ADA) is lower in TPE compared to PPE, but integrated analysis is warranted. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of theLDH/ADA ratio in differentiating TPE and PPE. We explored the PubMed and Scopusdatabases for studies evaluating the LDH/ADA ratio in differentiating TPE and PPE. Results: From a yield of 110 studies, five were included for systematic review. The cutoffvalue for the LDH/ADA ratio in TPE ranged from <14.2 to <25. The studies demonstratedhigh heterogeneity, precluding meta-analysis. Quality Assessment of DiagnosticAccuracy Studies Tool 2 assessment revealed a high risk of bias in terms of patientselection and index test. Conclusion: LDH/ADA ratio is a potentially useful parameter to differentiate betweenTPE and PPE. Based on the limited data, we recommend an LDH/ADA ratio cutoff valueof <15 in differentiating TPE and PPE. However, more rigorous studies are needed tofurther validate this recommendation.
Nyanti Larry Ellee,Chua Chia Zhen,Loo Han Chuan,Khor Cheng Zhi,Toh Emilia Sheau Yuin,Gill Rasvinder Singh,Chan Eng Tat,Tan Ker Yin,Rosli Taufiq,Rahim Muhammad Aklil Abd,Ibrahim Arfian,Huan Nai Chien,R 대한결핵및호흡기학회 2023 Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases Vol.86 No.4
Background: Attitudes towards smoking, lung cancer screening, and perceived risk of lung cancer have not been widely studied in Malaysia. The primary objective of this study was to describe the factors affecting the willingness of high-risk current smokers and ex-smokers to undergo low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer.Methods: A prospective, cross-sectional questionnaire study was conducted in current smokers or ex-smokers aged between 55 and 80 years at three hospitals in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. The questionnaire recorded the following parameters: perceived lung cancer risk; Prostate Lung Colon Ovarian Cancer 2012 risk prediction model excluding race and ethnicity predictor (PLCOm2012norace); demographic characteristics; psychosocial characteristics; and attitudes towards lung cancer and lung cancer screening.Results: A vast majority of the 95 respondents (94.7%) indicated their willingness to undergo screening. Stigma of lung cancer, low levels of knowledge about lung cancer symptoms, concerns about financial constraints, and a preference for traditional medication were still prevalent among the respondents, and they may represent potential barriers to lung cancer screening uptake. A desire to have an early diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 11.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53 to 84.05; p=0.02), perceived time constraints (OR, 3.94; 95% CI, 1.32 to 11.73; p=0.01), and proximity of LDCT screening facilities (OR, 14.33; 95% CI, 1.84 to 111.4; p=0.01) had significantly higher odds of willingness to undergo screening.Conclusion: Although high-risk current smokers and ex-smokers are likely to undergo screening for lung cancer, several psychosocial barriers persist. The results of this study may guide the policymakers and clinicians regarding the need to improve lung cancer awareness in our population.