Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14513271›Full record

ReviewDer Pathologe2003

[Pituitary gland tumors].

W Saeger

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Pathologe, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 73% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Sellar tumors].Der Radiologe · 2007
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

W SaegerInstitut für Pathologie des Marienkrankenhauses, Hamburg. WolfgangSaeger.HH@t-online.de
Marienkrankenhaus Hamburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pituitary adenomas must be clearly differentiated from other tumors of the sellar region (especially meningiomas, granular cell tumors, chordomas and germinomas), which may look very similar. The sub-classification of adenomas depends on the methods used, in particular the immunostaining for pituitary hormones. This sub-classification is not necessary in every case, but must be performed if unusual findings are observed during surgery or if surgery is unsuccessful and radiation or drug-therapy is planned. Special structures and non-immunohistochemical stainings are very helpful for typing adenomas. We differentiated monohormonal densely or sparsely granulated GH-cell adenomas, monohormonal sparsely or very rarely densely granulated prolactin cell adenomas, monohormonal densely or sparsely ACTH-cell adenomas, monohormonal TSH-cell adenomas and FSH/LH cell adenomas from bihormonal adenomas of mammosomatotroph or GH/prolactin cell type or of the acidophil stem cell adenoma type. The number of plurihormonal adenomas decreased with the use of improved monoclonal antibodies. Clinically inactive adenomas are classified as null cell adenomas, oncocytic adenomas or FSH/LH-cell adenomas. These appear as subtypes of one entity deriving from the gonadotroph cell type. Craniopharyngiomas are classified into adamantinous and papillary types, which are not only structurally but also clinically different. If adamantinous craniopharyngiomas show very strongly regressive changes, immunostaining for keratin may be necessary to identify the squamous epithelia for the demonstration of craniopharyngioma.

Indexed as

AdenomaDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansPituitary HormonesPituitary NeoplasmsSella TurcicaPituitary Hormones

Identifiers

PMID14513271
OpenAlexW2404809672

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.