ArticleMedicine2020
Characteristics and clinical outcomes in pituitary incidentalomas and non-incidental pituitary tumors treated with endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pituitary incidentaloma: a Pituitary Society international consensus guideline statement.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2025Review
- A Study in Pituitary Neuroendocrine Tumors (PitNETs): Real-Life Data Amid Baseline and Serial CT Scans.Cancers · 2024Article
- A Real-World Longitudinal Study in Non-Functioning Pituitary Incidentalomas: A PRECES Micro-Adenomas Sub-Analysis.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Incidental versus symptomatic nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas: Are they different?Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2023Article
- An Overview of Pituitary Incidentalomas: Diagnosis, Clinical Features, and Management.Cancers · 2022Review
- A patient-reported outcome measure for patients with pituitary adenoma undergoing transsphenoidal surgery.Pituitary · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn this retrospective study, we investigated the status and validity of endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (eTSS) for pituitary incidentalomas (PIs) as well as the value of basing the indication for surgery on the PI guidelines.
methodsPatients who underwent eTSS at Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital between 2012 and 2018 were divided into the PI group and the non-PI group in accordance with the PI guideline of the Endocrine Society and their clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes were compared and analyzed.
resultsA total of 59 patients were enrolled, with 35 patients in the PI group and 24 patients in the non-PI group. The diagnoses in the PI group were of non-functioning pituitary adenoma (NFPA) (n = 12, 34%), gonadotropin-producing pituitary adenoma (n = 8, 23%), Rathke cleft cyst (n = 7, 20%), meningioma (n = 4, 11%), and growth hormone-producing pituitary adenoma (n = 3, 9%); those in the non-PI group were of NFPA (n = 6, 25%), gonadotropin-producing pituitary adenoma (n = 3, 13%), Rathke cleft cyst (n = 3, 13%), growth hormone-producing pituitary adenoma (n = 3, 13%), and prolactin producing pituitary adenoma (n = 3, 13%). Regarding the preoperative factors, 1 patient in the PI group with panhypopituitarism was diagnosed with pituitary apoplexy (pure infarction) of an NFPA. The rates of postoperative anterior pituitary hormonal deficiencies (14% vs 46%, P = .015), residual tumor size (2 ± 5 vs 6 ± 7 mm, P = .008), and reoperation (n = 0, 0% vs n = 5, 21%, P = .005) were significantly different between the PI and non-PI groups.
conclusionsThis study showed that, postoperatively, the incidence of anterior pituitary hormonal deficiencies was lower in the PI than in the non-PI group, although it was comparable between the 2 groups before the operation. The patients in the PI group also had smaller residual tumors and a lower risk of reoperation than those in non-PI group. PIs could have a better postoperative clinical outcome than non-PIs when the indication for eTSS is based on preoperative scrutiny according to the PI guidelines and eTSS is performed by an experienced pituitary surgeon. Hence, more aggressive scrutiny and treatment for PIs might be desirable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.