ArticleHeliyon2024
Dual concentric echo sign of ultrasound in primary hyperparathyroidism: The clinical and histopathologic features and differentiation from lymph nodes.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Ultrasound (US) is the most economical and widely used method for detecting lesions in parathyroid regions. Identifying typically parathyroid adenomas as hypoechoic nodules with clear margins. However, 10 % of lesions exhibit atypical features, such as the dual concentric sign, and the cognition of them still needs to be improved. Objective: To promote understanding of clinical and histopathological features for parathyroid lesions with the dual concentric echo sign and to investigate its pathogenesis and methods for distinguishing from cervical lymph nodes to improve US diagnostic accuracy. Methods: Retrospectively, patients were categorized into three groups: Group 1, with 36 patients showing parathyroid lesions with dual concentric echo signs; Group 2, with 40 patients displaying classic hypoechoic parathyroid lesions; and Group 3, comprising 36 patients with identified lymph nodes, which were all examined from January 2018 to December 2019. The clinical data on demographics, clinical symptoms, serum levels, histopathologic findings, and US image characteristics were thoroughly reviewed. Results: According to the clinical data, no significant differences in demographics or lesion sizes were observed in Group 1 and Group 2 (p > 0.05). No significant variances were noted in biochemical markers, including PTH, T-25OHD, and ALP. However, a notable difference was identified in adjusted serum calcium levels, which were significantly lower in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p < 0.05). Additionally, the proportion of asymptomatic patients was significantly higher in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p < 0.05). Pathological examination revealed that all lesions with dual concentric echo signs were parathyroid adenomas. The isoechoic central region predominantly corresponded to areas of loose edema, while the hypoechoic peripheral layer was primarily associated with chief and/or oncocytic cells. By comparing the ultrasonography of Groups 1 and 3, the parathyroid lesions with dual concentric echo signs exhibited significant distinctions from lymph nodes in size, blood flow classification, vascular distribution, and anatomical location (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The parathyroid lesions with dual concentric echo signs in US corresponded to specific histopathological manifestations and relatively mild clinical features in the patients, this finding may increase the likelihood of incidental detection of parathyroid lesions by US. Attention to the details of size, location, and blood flow, especially, may aid US physicians in differentiating parathyroid adenomas from cervical lymph nodes.
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.