ArticleJournal of the Endocrine Society2026
Intraoperative PTH monitoring: does sampling site or assay generation matter?
Article in Journal of the Endocrine Society, 2026. 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.
- Intraoperative PTH monitoring: does sampling site or assay generation matter?Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Context: Primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) is a common endocrine disorder for which minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) is the standard surgical approach. Intraoperative parathyroid hormone (IOPTH) monitoring is commonly performed using second-generation (2G) parathyroid hormone (PTH) assay. Objective: To compare the performance of IOPTH central sampling peripheral sampling, and third-generation (3G) vs 2G assays in patients with PHPT. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study conducted at American University of Beirut Medical Center, a tertiary hospital in Beirut, Lebanon. The study included 68 subjects with confirmed PHPT who achieved surgical cure, defined as normocalcemia at ≥6 months. IOPTH levels were measured from central and peripheral venous samples using 2G and 3G assays at various time points. Results: The median age was 57 years, and 80% were female. One-fourth had osteoporosis or reported kidney stones. Median preoperative calcium was 10.8 mg/dL with PTH 104 pg/mL, and 82% had single-gland disease. IOPTH levels were significantly higher with 2G assay and central sampling vs 3G assay and peripheral sampling. The proportion of patients meeting the Miami criterion did not differ between assays or sampling sites. Median percentage drop in IOPTH was greater with the 3G assay compared to 2G, across all time points, at both sampling sites. Conclusion: Although both assays similarly identified a ≥50% intraoperative decline, 3G assays demonstrated a steeper and more consistent drop, suggesting that higher assay-specific thresholds may improve decision-making. Central and peripheral sampling showed comparable predictive performance, although central sampling may allow earlier detection of PTH decline.
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.