4.5 Article

Development of a Formula to Predict Parathyroid Carcinoma in Patients with Primary Hyperparathyroidism

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 36, 期 11, 页码 2605-2611

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-012-1707-9

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cure of parathyroid carcinoma (PC) requires initial en bloc resection, including resection of all tumor-bearing tissue, with hemithyroidectomy and dissection of the central lymph node compartment. Unfortunately, no reliable preoperative criteria have yet been assessed to indicate a high likelihood of PC. Thus, the aim of the present study was to develop a formula to indicate preoperatively the presence of PC. A prospective database of 1,363 patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (pHPT) was screened for patients with PC. Age, gender, surgical procedures, laboratory data, and follow-up results were evaluated and compared to a group of patients with benign pHPT. Based on preoperative serum calcium (Ca) and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels, as well as patients' age at the time of diagnosis, a formula was developed by a multivariate logistic model that estimates the individual risk for PC. Between 1987 and 2008, 19 patients with PC were identified. Ca (3.8 +/- A 0.3 vs 2.9 +/- A 0.3 mmo/l; p = 0.0002) and PTH levels (1,250 +/- A 769 vs 194 +/- A 204 pg/ml; p = 0.0030) were significantly higher in patients with PC than in those with benign pHPT. Patients with PC were also significantly younger than patients with benign pHPT (48.9 +/- A 12.1 vs 59.1 +/- A 13.8 years; p < 0.05). With a a parts per thousand yen5 % probability that a given patient suffered from PC, the sensitivity and specificity to identify the disease were 100 and 30 %, respectively, with the new Ca, PTH, and age based logarithmic formula. The new logarithmic formula can be used to calculate the individual risk for PC. If the calculated individual risk exceeds 5 %, en bloc resection seems to be justified to provide long-term cure in case of PC.

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

4.5
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