 |
|
LETTER TO THE EDITOR |
|
| Year : 2020 | Volume
: 15
| Issue : 3 | Page : 182 |
|
| Polymorphonuclear-rich and lymphocyte-rich tuberculous pleural effusion |
|
|
Shinichiro Okauchi1, Katsunori Kagohashi1, Toshihiro Shiozawa2, Kunihiko Miyazaki3, Hiroaki Satoh1
1 Division of Respiratory Medicine, Mito Medical Center, University of Tsukuba, Ryugasaki, Japan
2 Division of Respiratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tsukuba, Ryugasaki, Japan
3 Division of Respiratory Medicine, Ryugasaki Saiseikai Hospital, Ryugasaki, Japan
| Date of Submission | 22-Apr-2020 |
| Date of Acceptance | 04-Jun-2020 |
| Date of Web Publication | 18-Jun-2020 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Hiroaki Satoh
Division of Respiratory Medicine, Mito Medical Center, University of Tsukuba, Ryugasaki
Japan
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/atm.ATM_172_20
|
|
How to cite this article:
Okauchi S, Kagohashi K, Shiozawa T, Miyazaki K, Satoh H. Polymorphonuclear-rich and lymphocyte-rich tuberculous pleural effusion. Ann Thorac Med 2020;15:182 |
Sir,
We read with interest the article entitled, “clinical and pathological differences between polymorphonuclear-rich and lymphocyte-rich tuberculous pleural effusion” by Zhao et al.[1] We have been particularly interested in various pleurisy including tuberculous and malignant pleuritis,[2],[3] so we would like to discuss four issues. First, the authors showed the results of 232 patients with definitive diagnosis. Please let us know why the authors evaluated the significance of analyzing the pleural effusions of these patients together, although the authors collected patients with definitive and probable patients separately. Were the results similar to those in the 304 patients presented? Second, we do appreciate hearing from the authors how they evaluated the possible outcome of mixed infections with common bacteria other than mycobacteria. In other words, how did the authors rule out the possibility of infection by common bacteria other than mycobacteria? Third, the authors discussed the relationship between time course and cellular changes in pleural effusion with reference to the article by Vorster et al.[4] We do suppose that different timing of collecting cells in the pleural fluid might play a major role in the results obtained in this study. How can we clarify the results obtained in this study, taking into account the fact that tuberculous pleurisy does not have a clear onset? Fourth, if there are neutrophil- and lymphocyte-dominant pleurisy, we would like to know how the authors evaluate this pathological significance and its impact on treatment.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
 References | |  |
| 1. | Zhao T, Chen B, Xu Y, Qu Y. Clinical and pathological differences between polymorphonuclear-rich and lymphocyte-rich tuberculous pleural effusion. Ann Thorac Med 2020;15:76-83.  [Full text] |
| 2. | Naito T, Ohtsuka M, Ishikawa H, Satoh H, Hasegawa S. Lymphocyte chemotactic factor in tuberculous pleural effusion. Kekkaku 1998;73:307-14. |
| 3. | Ohara G, Iguchi K, Satoh H. VATS and intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy for parapneumonic empyema. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018;24:263-4. |
| 4. | Vorster MJ, Allwood BW, Diacon AH, Koegelenberg CF. Tuberculous pleural effusions: Advances and controversies. J Thorac Dis 2015;7:981-91. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
