4.2 Article

Do Symptoms and Serum Calcium Levels Affect the Results of Surgical Treatment of Primary Hyperparathyroidism?

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2019, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2019/2150159

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in surgical outcomes between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) and between patients with high serum calcium and those with normal blood calcium, as well as to explore the epidemiological trend of PHPT in northern China. Methods. Clinicopathologic data of 197 patients (50 men and 147 women) with PHPT who underwent surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University from 2008 to 2017 were analyzed. Changes in clinicopathology were compared among different subgroups of patients. Patients were categorized into subgroups based on serum calcium levels, whether or not they presented with symptoms, and admission time. Results. Of the total patients, 82.23% had hypercalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism (HCPHPT), 17.77% had normocalcemic primary hyperparathyroidism (NCPHPT), 45.18% had symptomatic primary hyperparathyroidism (SPHPT), and 54.82% had asymptomatic primary hyperparathyroidism (ASPHPT). Seventy-seven cases of PHPT involved thyroid nodules, with 22 confirmed as papillary thyroid carcinoma, and 29 confirmed as nodular goiter. There was no significant difference in the success rate of surgery, postoperative recurrence rate, and the symptoms of temporary hypocalcemia between the HCPHPT and NCPHPT groups, and between the SPHPT and ASPHPT groups. The incidence of PHPT has increased threefold since 2013. Conclusions. Symptoms and serum calcium levels did not affect the results of surgical treatment for PHPT. The incidence of PHPT in northern China is increasing. Moreover, PHPT manifestation has shifted from the symptomatic to the asymptomatic form. Thyroid surgery should be performed in PHPT patients with thyroid nodules.

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

4.2
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