Journal of thoracic disease · 2020
A multidisciplinary approach for the diagnosis of benign asbestos pleural effusion: a single-center experience.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Luo Weizhan, Zeng Yunxiang, Shen Panxiao, Wu Xiaobing, Wang Jinlin, Zhang Ximing
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is little detailed information regarding benign asbestos pleural effusion (BAPE). It is frequently misdiagnosed because of lack of a standardized diagnostic approach and criteria. The present study aimed to better characterize BAPE and outline a diagnostic approach for this disease.
METHODS: Complete clinical data of 11 consecutive patients with BAPE were prospectively collected and analysed. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) was involved in discussing the suspected cases of BAPE. The team was comprised of thoracic physicians, radiologists and pathologists. A multidisciplinary practical diagnostic approach for BAPE was introduced.
RESULTS: Six patients had respiratory symptoms, but another 5 were asymptomatic. All the patients had an asbestos exposure and the median duration was 23.9 years (rang, 12-36 years). The median level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), adenosine deaminase (ADA), proteins and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the pleural fluid (PF) were 221.4 U/L (range, 189.8-11,325 U/L), 21 U/L (rang, 14-247 U/L), 48.3 g/dL (range, 35.2-53.2 g/dL) and 3.46 mg/mL (range, 0.84-4.54 mg/mL), respectively. Five patients had pleural plaques, 2 had diffuse pleural thickening (DPT), 1 had asbestosis, and 1 had round atelectasis. The pleural biopsy specimens showed a benign fibrotic pleura in all case. The symptoms and pleural pulmonary radiologic findings remained stable during the follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: BAPE is diagnosed by exclusion. A suspected diagnosis of BAPE with an asbestos exposure should be considered, especially with the presence of pleural plaques, and/or DPT, and rounded atelectasis. The MDT-based diagnostic approach may reduce misdiagnosis.
METHODS: Complete clinical data of 11 consecutive patients with BAPE were prospectively collected and analysed. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) was involved in discussing the suspected cases of BAPE. The team was comprised of thoracic physicians, radiologists and pathologists. A multidisciplinary practical diagnostic approach for BAPE was introduced.
RESULTS: Six patients had respiratory symptoms, but another 5 were asymptomatic. All the patients had an asbestos exposure and the median duration was 23.9 years (rang, 12-36 years). The median level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), adenosine deaminase (ADA), proteins and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the pleural fluid (PF) were 221.4 U/L (range, 189.8-11,325 U/L), 21 U/L (rang, 14-247 U/L), 48.3 g/dL (range, 35.2-53.2 g/dL) and 3.46 mg/mL (range, 0.84-4.54 mg/mL), respectively. Five patients had pleural plaques, 2 had diffuse pleural thickening (DPT), 1 had asbestosis, and 1 had round atelectasis. The pleural biopsy specimens showed a benign fibrotic pleura in all case. The symptoms and pleural pulmonary radiologic findings remained stable during the follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: BAPE is diagnosed by exclusion. A suspected diagnosis of BAPE with an asbestos exposure should be considered, especially with the presence of pleural plaques, and/or DPT, and rounded atelectasis. The MDT-based diagnostic approach may reduce misdiagnosis.