ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2024
Reconsideration of Surgical Indication for Prolactin-producing Pituitary Tumor Focusing on Visual Impairment.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prolactin-producing pituitary tumor (PRLoma) is the most prevalent functional pituitary tumor. If the tumor becomes large, vision can be impaired. In contrast to other pituitary tumors, cabergoline (CAB) is extremely effective for PRLoma and has become the first-line treatment. In this study, we examined our experience with the pharmacological and surgical management of PRLomas with visual impairment (VI) to determine whether VI could be a surgical indication. Further, we discussed the function of surgery in situations where the gold standard of PRLoma treatment was CAB administration. Of the 159 patients with PRLomas (age, 13-77 [mean = 36.3] years; men, 29; women, 130) at Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital from 2009 to 2021, 18 (age, 15-67 [mean = 35.8] years; men, 12; woman, 6) had VI (subjectively, 12; objectively, 6). They started CAB treatment immediately (maximum dose: 0.5 to 6 mg/week; average: 2.17 mg/week). VI improved in 16 patients (88.9%) but did not improve in 2 (11.1%) requiring surgeries. One of the two patients had a parenchymal tumor resistant to CAB, and the other had a cystic tumor due to intratumoral bleeding. Consequently, CAB is the first-line treatment for PRLomas with VI because of its significantly high rate of improvement. However, close and rigorous surveillance is necessary for cases resistant to CAB, and the correct decision is required regarding surgical interventions at proper timing and appropriate surgical approaches considering the purpose of surgery.
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.