4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Surgical treatment of congenital hyperinsulinism: Results from 500 pancreatectomies in neonates and children

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC SURGERY
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 27-32

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.10.030

关键词

Congenital hyperinsulinism; Pancreatectomy; Localized islet nuclear enlargement; Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome; Insulinoma; Multiple endocrine neoplasia-type 1 (MEN1)

资金

  1. NIH [R37 DK056268, R01 DK098517]
  2. Goldsmith Foundation
  3. Congenital Hyperinsulinism International

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Congenital Hyperinsulinism (HI) causes severe hypoglycemia in neonates and children. We reviewed our experience with pancreatectomy for the various types of HI. Methods: From 1998 to 2018,500 patients with HI underwent pancreatectomy: 246 for focal HI, 202 for diffuse HI, 37 for atypical HI (16 for Localized Islet Nuclear Enlargement [LINE], 21 for Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome), and 15 for insulinoma. Focal HI neonates were treated with partial pancreatectomy. Patients with diffuse HI who failed medical management underwent near-total (98%) pancreatectomy. Atypical HI patients had pancreatectomies tailored to the PET scan and biopsy findings. Results: The vast majority of pancreatectomies for focal HI were < 50%, and many were 2%-10%. 97% of focal HI patients are cured. For diffuse disease patients, 31% were euglycemic, 20% were hyperglycemic, and 49% required treatment for hypoglycemia; the incidence of diabetes increased with long-term follow-up. All 15 insulinoma patients were cured. Conclusions: Our approach to patients with focal HI can distinguish focal from diffuse HI, localize focal lesions, and permit partial pancreatectomy with cure in almost all focal patients. Surgery does not cure diffuse disease but can help prevent severe hypoglycemia and brain damage. Surgery can be curative for insulinoma and for some cases of atypical HI. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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