Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 31590

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesTable and Figures
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2010 | Month : June | Volume : 4 | Issue : 3 | Page : 2478 - 2483 Full Version

Evaluation Of Biochemical Parameters To Differentiate Transudates From Exudates In Certain Diseases

Published: June 1, 2010 | DOI:
KALE A B *, MODI M**, THORAT A P ***, CHALAK S S****, PATIL A B *****

*(MD)Biochemistry,AssociateProfessor, Department of Biochemistry, ** Consultant Pediatrician BLK Hospital Delhi, ***M.D. Biochemistry, Professor & Head, Deptt. of Biochemistry, B.J. Medical College, Pune. Maharashtra,(India) ****Post Graduate, Deptt. Of Physiology , *****Post Graduate, Deptt. Of Pharmacology JNMC, Sawangi, Wardha., Maharashtra Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Sawangi (Meghe), Wardha, Maharashtra.(India)

Correspondence Address :
Anita B. Kale, MD Biochemistry, Associate Professor, Department of Biochemistry, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Sawangi (Meghe), Wardha, Maharashtra.(India)


Background: Pleural effusion is a common occurrence in medicine wards/OPD. To determine the cause of the pleural effusion is not always easy. The distinction between an exudate and a transudate is the first and the most important step in the differential diagnosis of a pleural effusion. Several biochemical markers are used to classify the type of pleural effusion. The oldest and the most conventional way of classifying the pleural effusion is by the Light’s criteria. There are multiple other biochemical markers which are available, the diagnostic accuracy of which is not well established and is a subject of debate.
Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the pleural fluid protein, LDH, cholesterol, bilirubin and their ratio with serum values, as well as the albumin gradient in differentiating the pleural fluid into transudate and exudate .
Materials And Methods: A total of 50 cases of pleural effusion due to different diseases were analysed using certain biochemical parameters like pleural fluid cholesterol, protein and LDH. Their ratio with serum values and the albumin gradient were also analysed.
Statistical Analysis: ROC curves were drawn for individual markers and the areas under the curve were computed and compared using the SPSS version 17. The optimal cut off with a combination of highest sensitivity and specificity was defined.
Result: The pleural fluid protein, its ratio to serum protein and pleural fluid LDH had excellent diagnostic accuracy in differentiating exudative pleural effusions from transudative effusions. Pleural fluid LDH levels were not influenced by serum LDH levels. The optimal threshold for pleural fluid LDH was 175 IU/L.
Conclusion: The pleural fluid to serum protein ratio and pleural fluid LDH had excellent diagnostic accuracy in classifying the pleural fluid type. A single test pleural fluid LDH had diagnostic performance higher than or comparable to most of the other biochemical parameters.


Transudate, Exudate, Lactate dehydrogenase, Cholesterol, Albumin gradient

Clinical evaluation of a patient with pleural effusion relies heavily upon the examination of the fluid which is obtained by thoracentesis. Defining the exact aetiology is difficult and is not always possible. The pleural effusion is most conveniently separated into trasudate (ultra filtrates of plasma resulting from increased hydrostatic pressure or profoundly decreased serum oncotic pressure) and exudate (protein-rich effusions resulting from increased capillary permeability depending upon their characteristics)(1),(2). Such discrimination directs towards the nature of the underlying disorder and is helpful in narrowing down the possible aetiologies. A transudative effusion might not warrant further diagnostic procedures, whereas in exudative effusion, further detailed investigations might need to be carried out to establish the cause. Multiple biochemical markers are used to differentiate the exudates from the transudates. The conventional method for classifying the pleural fluid is based on Light’s criteria. As per Light’s criteria, an effusion is termed as exudative if the pleural fluid to serum ratio of the total protein (TPR) is >/= 0.5, if the pleural fluid absolute lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level is >/= 200 IU/L, or if the pleural fluid to serum ratio of LDH (LDHR) is >0.6 and as transudative if the TPR is <0.5, if the fLDH level is <200 IU/L and the LDHR is <0.6. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracies of the pleural fluid protein, pleural fluid lactate dehydrogenase, pleural fluid total cholesterol and pleural fluid bilirubin, their ratios to serum values and pleural fluid albumin as well as the albumin gradient (serum-fluid albumin) in differentiating pleural fluids into transudates and exudates (3).

Material and Methods

The present study was carried out at the Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad and was approved by the institutional ethical committee. A total of 50 patients having pleural effusions and suffering from various diseases were included in this study. Pleural fluids and blood samples were taken simultaneously in the fasting state. The blood and pleural fluids were collected in plain sterile bulbs. Serum and pleural fluid LDH was estimated by a modified IFCC method (4). Serum and pleural fluid total protein was estimated by the Biuret method (5),(6),(7). Serum and pleural fluid albumin was estimated by the BCG dye binding method (7),(8),(9). Serum and pleural fluid cholesterol was estimated by the CHOD-PAP method (10). The pleural fluid to serum ratio of the above mentioned markers were calculated. The albumin gradient was calculated by computing the difference between the serum and pleural albumin levels. The enrolled subjects were grouped into exudates and transudates based on Light’s criteria (11),(12),(13),(14),(15),(16),(17).

Statistical Analysis
ROC curves were drawn for individual markers and the areas under the curve were computed and compared using SPSS version 17. The optimal cut off with a combination of highest sensitivity and specificity was defined from the table of coordinates of the parameters (based upon the value with the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity).


A total of 50 patients with pleural effusions were analysed. In nine, the pleural effusions were transudative and the remaining 41 of the 50 were exudative, as per Light’s criteria. The socioeconomic and the nutritional aspects of the groups were comparable. The ROC curves of individual biochemical parameters (pleural fluid value) and their ratio/difference with serum values are depicted in (Table/Fig 1) and (Table/Fig 2). The numerical values of optimal threshold with their sensitivity/specificity are shown in (Table/Fig 3). Values of area under curve for each parameters is shown in (Table/Fig 4). The pleural fluid levels of LDH and total protein and their ratios with serum levels had the highest value of AUC and fluid bilirubin had the lowest value.

(Table/Fig 3)The optimal discriminatory cut off values for each parameter in differentiating exudates from transudates.

(Table/Fig 4) area under ROC curve for individual biochemical parameter/ratios

Correlation between serum levels and pleural fluid levels of different parameters is shown in (Table/Fig 5). All parameters other than LDH showed a significant correlation between serum and pleural fluid values.

(Table/Fig 5) Correlation between serum levels and pleural fluid levels of biochemical parameters


Differentiating the pleural fluid in a transudate or an exudate is an important step in the evaluation of pleural effusions. The conventional method which is used to classify pleural fluid is the Light’s criteria, which is based upon the pleural fluid to serum protein ratio, pleural fluid LDH levels and the pleural fluid to serum LDH ratio. The accuracy of these tests has been reported to be 100% (18). However, classifying pleural effusion on the basis of the above mentioned criteria needs the measurement of 4 biochemical parameters, the pleural fluid total protein, serum total protein, pleural fluid LDH and serum LDH levels. As an individual parameter, each of the above parameters has different sensitivities and specificities and pleural fluid LDH has been reported to be the more sensitive and specific than the total protein ratio or the LDH ratio (19), (20). In our study, we observed an excellent discriminatory accuracy of pleural fluid protein and LDH levels (and their ratios with serum), AUC 0.99. Pleural fluid cholesterol and its ratio with serum also had good discriminatory ability with AUC >0.9. Pleural fluid bilirubin and the albumin gradient had the least discriminatory accuracy. These observations reaffirm the utility of Pleural fluid to serum protein and the LDH ratio , as well as pleural fluid LDH levels in differentiating exudative pleural effusions.

The basis for using the pleural fluid to serum ratio of protein and LDH (rather than using absolute pleural fluid levels) is that their pleural fluid levels might be influenced by the changes in serum levels and so, absolute pleural fluid levels might give erroneous results in the face of varying serum levels. In our study, the pleural fluid levels of all biochemical parameters other than LDH showed a statistically significant correlation with serum values (though the correlation coefficient was poor for most parameters). The pleural fluid LDH levels were not influenced by the serum levels and hence, pleural fluid LDH can independently (rather than its ratio to the serum level) be used in classifying pleural effusion. Our observation is similar to the report by Joseph et al and it is suggested that in classifying pleural fluid, the absolute fluid value rather than its ratio with serum levels, should be used as it will save the cost of serum testing. Further, there is a possibility of the misclassification of the pleural fluid into exudates in the face of low serum LDH levels, as low serum LDH levels can result in high LDHR, thus causing the false classification of a transudate as an exudates (20).

The optimal cut off of pleural fluid LDH levels to define exudates as per Light’s criteria is >200 IU/L. The optimal threshold for pleural fluid LDH in our study was much lower (175 IU/L) than those suggested by Light. Similarly, a lower cut off point (163 IU/L) has been reported by Joseph et al (20). We suggest that the optimal threshold for pleural fluid LDH levels should be redefined and validated in a larger study with a higher number of subjects.


To summarize that pleural fluid to serum protein ratio and pleural fluid LDH have excellent diagnostic accuracy in classifying the pleural fluid type. A single test, the pleural fluid LDH has a performance which is comparable to the other parameters. The optimal cut off point of pleural fluid LDH still needs to be addressed.


Wilson et al. Harrison’s principles of internal medicine. 12th ed. 1991. P. 1111-6,
Cotran RS, Kumar V, Robbins SL. Robbins pathologic basis of disease. 4th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders International Edition; 1989. P. 39-41.
Light RW, Macgregor MI, Luchsinger PC, Ball WC. Pleural effusions: The diagnostic separation of transudates and exudates. Ann Int Med 1972;77:507-13.
Recommendations for the measurement of LDH in human serum at 30 c. Ann Biol Chem 1982;40:87.
Tietz NW. Text book of Clinical Chemistry. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co; 1986. P. 579-82.
Reinholdnjg. In standard methods of clinical chemistry. New York and London Academic Press;1953; 1: 88.
Alan H Gowenlock. Varley’s practical clinical biochemistry. 6th ed. Delhi: CBS Publishers; 1988. P. 407-8.
Douman et al. Standard methods of clinical chemistry. Chicago: Academic press; 1972. P. 175-89.
Doumas BT, Watson WA, Biggs HG. Clin Chim Acta 1971;31:87.
Allain CC et al. Enzymatic determination of total serum cholesterol. Clin Chem 1974;20:470-5.
Jain AP, Gupta OP, Khan N. Comparative diagnostic efficiency of criteria used for differentiating transudate and exudates pleural effusions. J A P I 1982; 30 (11):823-6.
Ortega L, Heredia JL, Armengol R, Mir I Romanillas T, Armengol J. The differential diagnosis between exudates and transudates: the value of cholesterol. Med Clin (Barc) Spanish 1991; 96(10):367-70.
Lakhotia M, Shah PKD, Yadav A, Gupta A, Modi RK, Sinha HV. Comparison of biochemical parameters in pleural effusion. J A P I 1996;44: 612-4.
Heffner JE, Brown LK, Barbieri CA. Diagnostic value of tests that discriminate between exudative and
transudative pleural fluids - primary study investigators. Chest 1997;111(4):970-80.
Gazquez I, Porcel M, Vives M, Vicente de, Vera MC, Rubio M et al. Comparative analysis of Light’s criteria and other biochemical parameters for distinguishing transudates from exudates. Respir Med 1998;92:762-5.
Light RW. Diagnostic principles in pleural disease. Eur Respir J 1997;10(2): 476-81.
Jay SJ. Diagnostic procedures for for pleural disease. Cli Chest Med 1985; 6: 33-48
Chandrasekhar AJ, Palatao A, Dubin A et al. Pleural fluid lactic acid dehydrogenase activity and protein content. Value in diagnosis. Arch Intern Med 1969; 123: 48-50
Joseph J, Badrinath P, Basran GS, Sahn SA. Is the pleural fluid transudate or exudates? A revisit of the diagnostic criteria. Thorax 2001; 56: 867-70

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)