4.6 Article

Factors Associated With Endocrine Deficits After Stereotactic Radiosurgery of Pituitary Adenomas

期刊

NEUROSURGERY
卷 67, 期 1, 页码 27-32

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000370978.31405.A9

关键词

Acromegaly; Cushing's disease; Pituitary adenoma; Prolactin; Stereotactic radiosurgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the factors associated with anterior pituitary deficits after pituitary adenoma stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). METHODS: The tumor, pituitary stalk, and pituitary gland were segmented on the dose plans of 82 patients (secreting tumors, n = 53; nonsecreting tumors, n = 29) for dose-volume analysis. No patient had undergone prior radiation therapy and all patients had at least 12 months of endocrinological follow-up (median, 63 months; mean, 69 months; range, 13-134). RESULTS: Thirty-four patients (41%) developed new anterior pituitary deficits at a median of 32 months (range, 2-118) after SRS. The risk of developing new anterior pituitary deficits was 16% and 45% at 2 and 5 years, respectively. Multivariate analysis of the entire group showed that poor visualization of the pituitary gland (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10-6.25, P =.03) was associated with a higher rate of new anterior pituitary deficits. Dosimetric analysis of 60 patients whose pituitary gland could be clearly identified showed that increasing mean pituitary gland radiation dose correlated with new anterior pituitary deficits (HR = 1.11, 95% CI = 1.02-1.20, P =.02). New anterior pituitary deficits stratified by mean pituitary gland radiation dose: <= 7.5 Gy, 0% (0/7); 7.6 to 13.2 Gy, 29% (7/24); 13.3 to 19.1 Gy, 39% (9/23); > 19.1 Gy, 83% (5/6). CONCLUSION: New endocrine deficits after pituitary adenoma radiosurgery were correlated with increasing radiation dose to the pituitary gland. Methods that limit the radiation dose to the pituitary gland during SRS may increase the probability of preserving pituitary function.

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

4.6
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