4.4 Article

An analysis of different therapeutic options in patients with Cushing's syndrome due to bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia: a single-centre experience

Journal

CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 82, Issue 6, Pages 808-815

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cen.12763

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ContextBilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia (BMAH) is a rare form of Cushing's syndrome (CS). A variety of invivo tests to identify aberrant receptor expression have been proposed to guide medical treatment. Unilateral adrenalectomy (UA) may be effective in selected patients, but little is known about recurrence during follow-up. ObjectiveTo describe a series of patients with BMAH and CS treated by different approaches, with a particular focus on the benefit of UA. Design and patientsWe retrospectively assessed 16 patients with BMAH and CS (11 females, five males), analysing the invivo cortisol response to different provocative tests. Twelve of the 16 patients underwent UA and were monitored over the long term. ResultsBased on invivo test results, octreotide LAR or propranolol was administered in one case of food-dependent CS and two patients with a positive postural test. A significant improvement in biochemical values was seen in all patients but with limited clinical response. UA was performed in 12 patients, producing long-term remission in three (10628months; range: 80-135), recurrence in eight (after 54 +/- 56months; range 12-180) and persistence in one other. Four patients subsequently underwent contralateral adrenalectomy for overt CS, one received ketoconazole, and four other patients remain under observation for subclinical CS. ConclusionsMedical treatment based on cortisol response to provocative tests had a limited role in our patients, whereas UA was useful in some of them. Although recurrence is likely, the timing of onset is variable and close follow-up is mandatory to identify it.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available