3.9 Article

Factors Associated with Biochemical Remission after Microscopic Transsphenoidal Surgery for Acromegaly

Journal

Publisher

THIEME MEDICAL PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1354578

Keywords

acromegaly; remission; transsphenoidal surgery

Funding

  1. Novartis Pharmaceuticals
  2. Ipsen
  3. Congress of Neurological Surgeons Christopher C. Getch Flagship Fellowship Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectivesTo analyze surgical outcomes and predictive factors of disease remission in acromegaly patients who underwent microscopic transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) for a growth hormone (GH)-secreting adenoma. DesignA 6-year retrospective review of 86 consecutive acromegaly surgeries. SettingProcedures performed at a single institution by a single surgeon. ParticipantsSeventy acromegaly patients. Main Outcome MeasuresDemographic information, preoperative laboratory values, tumor imaging data, and morphological and immunohistochemical data were collected. Predictive values using the latest and most stringent biochemical remission criteria were determined using univariate and multivariate statistical analyses. ResultsRemission rate for 59 (18 males) acromegaly patients meeting the study inclusion criteria was 52.5%. Remission rates for micro- and macroadenomas were 81.8% and 45.8%, respectively. Patients of older age, with a smaller tumor, lower Knosp grade, lower preoperative GH, and insulinlike growth factor 1 levels were more likely to achieve remission. Remission rate decreased significantly with repeat surgeries. Those patients with adenomas that stained positive for somatostatin receptor subtype 2A were less likely to experience tumor recurrence and more likely to respond to medical treatment with persistent or elevated GH hypersecretion. ConclusionsMicroscopic TSS continues to be a viable means for treating acromegaly patients. Patients should be followed long term.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available