4.1 Review

Acromegaly: achieving timely diagnosis and improving outcomes by personalized care

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MED.0000000000000650

关键词

acromegaly; age; comorbidities; diabetes; sex; growth hormone-secreting adenoma; pegvisomant; somatostatin receptor ligands; transsphenoidal surgery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Patients with acromegaly often experience a significant delay between the onset of symptoms and diagnosis, with women and younger patients experiencing longer delays. Comorbidities usually improve after treatment except for irreversible osteoarticular structural changes. Early diagnosis and personalized care are crucial for better management of the condition.
Purpose of review Discuss recent literature regarding clinical manifestations and comorbidities in acromegaly, with focus on early diagnosis and customized care. Recent findings The mean interval between onset of clinical manifestations and diagnosis is currently 3-5 years. Women, especially younger than 50 years of age, experience longer delays, have lower insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels and larger tumors than men. Development of comorbidities usually precedes the diagnosis and is influenced by age, sex, and biochemical disease activity. Comorbidities other than irreversible osteoarticular structural changes usually improve after acromegaly treatment. In patients with diabetes, the course of hyperglycemia not only depends on biochemical control but also on specific acromegaly therapies. Quality of life is influenced by sex, as well as by acromegaly symptoms, biochemical activity, and treatment. Quality of life remains lower than general population despite biochemical remission. Early diagnosis can be achieved by suspecting acromegaly based on suggestive clinical scenarios rather than obvious changes in appearance. Personalized care entails a proactive multidisciplinary approach to identify and treat comorbidities while carefully monitoring the effects of acromegaly treatment.

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

4.1
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