4.7 Article

Discordance Between Imaging and Adrenal Vein Sampling in Primary Aldosteronism Irrespective of Interpretation Criteria

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 104, Issue 6, Pages 1900-1906

Publisher

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2018-02089

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Subtyping of primary aldosteronism (PA) using imaging and adrenal vein sampling (AVS) may yield discordant results, causing confusion in management. Interpretation criteria for AVS lateralization may affect discordance rates. Methods: We identified consecutive patients with PA who underwent AVS at a quaternary care center between January 2006 and May 2018. Patient demographics, laboratory results, diagnostic imaging, and AVS results were retrieved. Adrenal cross-sectional imaging was compared with AVS findings. The presence of lateralization was defined using varying thresholds for the lateralization index (LI) from >2:1 to >5:1. Discordance was defined by a unilateral lesion on imaging with contralateral or nonlateralization on AVS. Results: A total of 342 patients were included; 68.7% had hypokalemia. With cross-sectional imaging, 191 (55.6%) patients had unilateral lesions, 47 (13.7%) had bilateral lesions, and 104 (30.4%) had normal imaging. Overall discordance rates were high, ranging from 22% to 28% for LI thresholds of >2:1 and >5:1, respectively. Discordance between imaging and AVS was positively correlated with LI threshold stringency (P < 0.001). Patients with normal or bilateral lesions on imaging frequently lateralized on AVS. Lateralization, when present, was approximately equal between left and right sides, irrespective of the LI threshold. Conclusions: Discrepancies between imaging and AVS were common, even among patients with nonspecific imaging. Discordance was greatest with the strictest AVS interpretation criteria. Even under the most lenient thresholds, apparent discordance between imaging and AVS exceeded 20% and may limit the ability to make surgical decisions. Reliance on imaging alone for detecting lateralization may be misleading.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available