SynthesisPituitary2022
Surgical strategies in the treatment of MR-negative Cushing's Disease: a systematic review and treatment algorithm.
Synthesis in Pituitary, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Double pituitary adenomas: report of two cases and systematic review of the literature.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- Beyond the MRI-positive/MRI-negative dichotomy: A stepwise surgical strategy for Cushing's disease.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Specific focus on the basal dura for improving Cushing's disease surgery: a cohort study.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Surgical Treatment of Cushing's Disease: The Lessons Learned.Advances and technical standards in neurosurgery · 2025Review
- An individualized approach to the management of Cushing disease.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2023Review
- Pediatric pituitary neuroendocrine tumors-a 13-year experience in a tertiary center.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral surgical strategies have been proposed to treat MRI-negative Cushing's Disease. These include tumor removal, if identified, and if a tumor is not identified, resection of varying degrees of the pituitary gland, often guided by inferior petrosal sinus sampling (IPSS). The relative risks and benefits of each strategy have never been compared.
methodsThis systematic review of the literature included only studies on the results of surgery for MRI-negative patients with Cushing's Disease in which the surgical strategy was clearly described and associated remission and/or hypopituitarism rates detailed for each strategy.
resultsWe identified 12 studies that met inclusion criteria for remission rates and 5 studies for hypopituitarism rates. We divided cases into 6 resection strategies. Remission and hypopituitarism rates for each strategy were: (1) tumor identified, resect tumor only (68%, 0%); (2) resect tumor and surrounding capsule (85%, 0%); and if the tumor was not identified (3) resect inferior 1/3 of gland (78%, no data); (4) resect 30-50% of gland based on IPSS (68%, 13%); (5) resect > 50% but < 100% of gland (65%, 9%); (6) resect entire gland (66%, 67%). Strategy 3 only contained 9 patients.
conclusionRemission rates for MRI-negative Cushing's Disease support surgery as a reasonable approach. Results are best if a tumor is found. If a tumor is not identified, one can either remove one-third of the gland guided by IPSS lateralization, or remove both lateral portions along with the inferior portion leaving sufficient central gland to preserve function. Our recommendations are limited by the lack of rigorous and objective data.
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.