4.3 Article

Case of adrenocorticotropic hormone-independent macronodular adrenal hyperplasia with possible adrenal hypersensitivity to angiotensin II

期刊

ENDOCRINE
卷 15, 期 1, 页码 57-61

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1385/ENDO:15:1:057

关键词

adrenocorticotropic hormone-independent; macronodular adrenal hyperplasia; angiotensin II; AT1 receptor; arginine vasopressin; adrenal hypersensitivity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With increasing case reports, it has been indicated that some cases with adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-independent macronodular adrenal hyperplasia (AIMAH) show abnormal responses in cortisol to various stimulation tests. Here we report a case of AIMAH that showed an aberrant response to angiotensin II via AT1 receptor in cortisol hypersecretion. A 53-yr-old man was admitted to our division seeking further examinations for the possible diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome. He had hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and physical stigmata, such as moon face and central obesity. His plasma ACTH level was undetectable, and plasma cortisol level was high. Plasma cortisol showed no normal diurnal rhythm and was not suppressed after the administration of 8 mg of dexamethasone. Abdominal computed tomography demonstrated nodular enlargement of bilateral adrenal glands. He was diagnosed with Cushing's syndrome owing to AIMAH. An injection of arginine vasopressin (AVP) increased plasma cortisol and aldosterone levels, whereas ACTH remained undetectable. After 4 h in an upright position, plasma cortisol and aldosterone levels were increased. Pretreatment with candesartan, angiotensin II receptor ATI antagonist, blocked the increase in plasma cortisol level. These results suggested a possibility of adrenal hypersensitivity to angiotensin II and AVP in cortisol secretion. Bilateral laparoscopic adrenalectomy was performed. The histological findings of the specimen were compatible with AIMAH. In summary, we have made the first report on a case of AIMAH with possible hypersensitivity to angiotensin II.

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

4.3
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