4.6 Review

Systematic review of phaeochromocytoma in pregnancy

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 100, Issue 2, Pages 182-190

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8976

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Phaeochromocytoma in pregnancy is a rare and potentially dangerous situation for mother and fetus. This review aimed to assess current mortality rates and how medical and surgical management affect these. Methods: Articles in English published between 2000 and 2011 were obtained from a MEDLINE search. Eligible publications presented women diagnosed with phaeochromocytoma in the antenatal or immediate postnatal period, and reported management and outcomes. Results: A total of 135 reports were identified. After applying inclusion criteria, 77 pregnancies involving 78 fetuses were analysed. Fetal and maternal mortality rates were 17 per cent (13 of 78) and 8 per cent (6 of 77) respectively. Better outcomes were achieved when the diagnosis of phaeochromocytoma was made in the antenatal period than when it was made during labour or immediately postpartum (survival of both mother and fetus(es) in 48 of 56 versus 12 of 21 respectively; P = 0.012). When the diagnosis was made before 23 weeks' gestation, there was no difference in outcomes when phaeochromocytoma surgery was carried out in the second trimester, compared with when it was postponed to the third trimester or after delivery (fetal death 2 of 18 versus 2 of 8 respectively; P = 0.563). Conclusion: This review, although limited by the rarity of the condition and level of available evidence, demonstrated that survival rates are improved if the diagnosis of phaeochromocytoma can be established antenatally. With diagnosis before 23 weeks' gestation, no definite advantage of proceeding with tumour removal during the second trimester could be demonstrated. Copyright (C) 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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