4.7 Article

Depression in Primary Hyperparathyroidism: Prevalence and Benefit of Surgery

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
卷 96, 期 11, 页码 E1737-E1745

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2011-1486

关键词

-

资金

  1. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Nutrition, and Metabolism, Mayo Clinic Rochester

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (PHP) often report nonspecific symptoms including mood disturbances. Objective: The objective of the study was to determine the frequency of depression in PHP and assess its response to parathyroidectomy. Methods: A case-control study at a referral center in Rochester, MN, performed Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) assessments in observed (n = 81) and surgical (n = 88) PHP and benign nontoxic surgical thyroid disease (n = 85) at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery or the initial questionnaire in observed PHP. Baseline PHQ-9 scores and their response to surgery were evaluated. Results: The groups were similar in gender and depression history, but PHP patients were older. Baseline PHQ-9 scores were 1.71 points higher in PHP than controls after adjusting for age and gender (P = .004). Clinically significant PHQ-9 scores (>= 10) were twice as common in PHP (31.4%) compared with thyroid subjects (15.3%). Parathyroidectomy resulted in significant and sustained reductions in PHQ-9 scores, which were greater than observed PHP at all time points (P < .001). PHP patients with clinically significant PHQ-9 scores dropped to 7.4% (P < .001) and 7.6% (P < .001) at 1 month and 1 yr after parathyroidectomy. There were greater declines in PHQ-9 scores after parathyroidectomy at 1, 3, and 6 months (P < .001) and 1 yr (P = .061) compared with thyroid surgery. Conclusions: Depression is common in patients with PHP. Parathyroidectomy results in greater improvement in PHQ-9 scores compared with thyroid surgery or observation of PHP. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96: E1737-E1745, 2011)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据