Pleural fluid interleukins for diagnosis of tuberculous pleural effusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: The diagnostic performance of pleural fluid interleukins as potential biomarkers for tuberculous pleural effusion (TPE) remains unclear. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of various interleukins in the pleural fluid for TPE and evaluated their ability to differentiate TPE from other effusions.
Methods: We queried the PubMed and Embase databases for studies indexed till October 2021. We included studies that (a) provided information regarding sensitivity and specificity of pleural fluid interleukins for diagnosing TPE, or (b) compared pleural fluid interleukin levels between TPE and malignant or parapneumonic effusions. We used hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic plots to model summary sensitivity and specificity. Random effects modeling was employed to pool standardized mean differences (SMD) across descriptive studies comparing TPE and other effusions.
Results: We included 80 publications in our review; most were small and of poor quality. All interleukins except interleukin-27 (interleukins 1-beta, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 12p40, 13, 18, 33) showed poor diagnostic accuracy and inconsistent discrimination of TPE from other effusions. The summary estimates for sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.94 (95 % CI 0.85-0.98), 0.97 (95 % CI 0.93-0.99), and 507.13 (95 % CI 130.66-1968.34) respectively for pleural fluid interleukin-27. Mean pleural fluid interleukin-27 levels in TPE were significantly higher than malignant (summary SMD 3.72, 95 % CI 2.81-4.63) or parapneumonic (summary SMD 2.45, 95 % CI -1.80-3.09) effusions.
Conclusion: Pleural fluid interleukins are poor diagnostic biomarkers for TPE. Only pleural fluid interleukin-27 exhibited good accuracy in diagnosing TPE and needs further evaluation.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)