4.6 Article

Recalcitrant hypocalcemia after thyroidectomy in patients with previous Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Journal

SURGERY
Volume 154, Issue 6, Pages 1300-1306

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.04.031

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Program in Cancer Outcomes Research Training Grant [NCI R25CA092203]
  2. Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Surgery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Hypocalcemia is a potential complication after thyroidectomy. Patients with previous roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) may be at increased risk for recalcitrant symptomatic hypocalcemia after thyroidectomy. This complication is poorly described and there is no current consensus on optimal management in this unique population. Methods. All patients from 2000 to 2012 who underwent thyroidectomy with history of preceding RYGBP were identified retrospectively. Each of the 19 patients meeting inclusion criteria were matched 2:1 for age, gender, and body mass index (BMI) to a cohort who underwent thyroidectomy without previous RYGBP. The study cohort and matched controls were compared for incidence of symptomatic postoperative hypocalcemia, requirement of intravenous (IV) calcium supplementation, and duration of hospital stay. Results. Age, proportion of female patients, and BMI were equivalent between cases (n = 19) and controls (n = 38). Comparison of primary outcomes demonstrated that the study group had a significantly higher incidence of symptomatic hypocalcemia (42% vs 0%; P < .01), administration of IV calcium (21% vs 0%; P < .01), and duration of hospital stay (2.2 vs 1.2 days, P = .02). Conclusion. Patients with previous RYGBP have a greater incidence of recalcitrant symptomatic hypocalcemia after thyroidectomy, resulting in prolonged duration of hospital stay. In this patient population, calcium levels should be closely monitored and early calcium and vitamin D supplementation initiated preemptively.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available