4.7 Review

The Effects of Sampling Lateralization on Bilateral Inferior Petrosal Sinus Sampling for Pediatric Cushing's Disease-A Single Endocrinology Centre Experience and Review of the Literature

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.650967

关键词

Cushing’ s disease; pituitary adenoma; BIPSS; hypercortisolemia; lateralization; adenoma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed the diagnostic accuracy of BIPSS in pediatric patients with CD, showing that BIPSS has high accuracy in identifying the underlying cause and guiding surgical intervention, but limited value in tumor localization.
Background This study aims to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of bilateral inferior petrosal sinus sampling (BIPSS), the gold standard test for the differential diagnosis of ACTH-dependent Cushing's syndrome (CS) in a group of pediatric patients with Cushing's disease (CD). Methods This is a retrospective analysis which include 12 patients with hypercortisolemia and inconclusive pituitary MRI, who underwent bilateral inferior petrosal sinus sampling (BIPSS) and transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) from 2004 to 2020 in the Children's Memorial Health Institute (CMHI) Warsaw, Poland. Pituitary origin of ACTH secretion was considered if baseline central to peripheral (C/P) ACTH level ratio was >= 2 or C/P ratio was >= 3 after human corticotropin-releasing hormone (hCRH) stimulation. The diagnosis was histologically confirmed in almost all cases after TSS. Results The diagnostic accuracy of BIPSS reached 75% at baseline and 83.3% after CRH stimulation. The compatibility of localization of a microadenoma by BIPSS with the surgical location was 66.7%. Conclusions Owing to its high diagnostic effectiveness, BIPSS remains the best test to differentiate CD from EAS. The indications for the procedure should be carefully considered, because EAS in the pediatric population, unlike in adults, is extremely rare. Moreover BIPSS has only limited value for indicating tumor localization.

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

4.7
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