European journal of endocrinology · 2004
Persistent disease after surgery for primary hyperparathyroidism: the long-term outcome.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hedbäck Gunilla, Odén Anders
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Nineteen patients with persistent primary hyperparathyroidism were investigated to evaluate their clinical and laboratory status a long time after treatment was ended. The risk of persistent disease and need for extensive surgery for cure, i.e. more than two neck operations, or mediastinal exploration, was also evaluated.
DESIGN: The medical records of 896 consecutive patients operated on for primary hyperparathyroidism were scrutinised at follow-up, a mean of 10.3 Years after surgery. Data on state of health, medication, bone fractures and other diagnoses were collected by use of a questionnaire. There were 600 patients still alive, among whom 13 had persistent disease and they were compared with 509 patients who were cured and without any suspicion of recurrent disease, according to laboratory examination.
RESULTS: Serum calcium and creatinine values had with few exceptions remained stable over the Years. In five patients, serum calcium levels were within the normal range at follow-up. Still, all 19 patients were considered hyperparathyroid. They had substantial cardiovascular morbidity, and their state of health was not as good as that of the patients who were surgically cured. After one operation, 5.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0-7.2%) had persistent disease, and 2.1% after reoperation. Extensive surgery for cure was performed in 2% of the patients (95% CI 1.1-3.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the state of health was significantly better for patients with cured primary hyperparathyroidism than for patients with persistent disease, but serious deterioration of laboratory values was uncommon. The result of the present study supports surgical treatment.
DESIGN: The medical records of 896 consecutive patients operated on for primary hyperparathyroidism were scrutinised at follow-up, a mean of 10.3 Years after surgery. Data on state of health, medication, bone fractures and other diagnoses were collected by use of a questionnaire. There were 600 patients still alive, among whom 13 had persistent disease and they were compared with 509 patients who were cured and without any suspicion of recurrent disease, according to laboratory examination.
RESULTS: Serum calcium and creatinine values had with few exceptions remained stable over the Years. In five patients, serum calcium levels were within the normal range at follow-up. Still, all 19 patients were considered hyperparathyroid. They had substantial cardiovascular morbidity, and their state of health was not as good as that of the patients who were surgically cured. After one operation, 5.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0-7.2%) had persistent disease, and 2.1% after reoperation. Extensive surgery for cure was performed in 2% of the patients (95% CI 1.1-3.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the state of health was significantly better for patients with cured primary hyperparathyroidism than for patients with persistent disease, but serious deterioration of laboratory values was uncommon. The result of the present study supports surgical treatment.