Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Introduction: Follow-up management of patients with acromegaly after pituitary surgery is performed by conducting biochemical assays of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF1). Despite concordant results of these two tests in the majority of cases, there is increasing recognition of patients who show persistent or intermittent discordance between GH and IGF1 (normal GH and elevated IGF1 or vice versa).
Method: In this narrative review, the last three decades materials on the issue of discrepancy between GH and IGF1 were thoroughly assessed.
Results: Various studies have obtained different discordance rates, ranging from 5.4 to 39.5%. At present, despite the use of current sensitive assays and more stringent criteria to define remission, the rate of discordance still remains high. A number of mechanisms have been proposed to explain the postoperative discordance of GH and IGF1 including; altered dynamics of the GH secretion after surgery, early postoperative hormone assay, inaccurate or less sensitive tests and laboratory errors, too high cut-off point for GH suppression in the GH assays, GH nadir values not adjusted to age, sex, and body mass index, the influence of concomitant medication, co-existing physiologic and pathologic conditions, and many other proposed reasons. Nevertheless, the underlying mechanisms are still far from clear, and the solution continues to evade complete elucidation. Similarly, the impacts of such a discrepancy over mortality and morbidity and the risk of biochemical and/or clinical recurrence are unclear.
Conclusion: As a challenging clinical problem, a stepwise evaluation and management of these patients appears to be more rational.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11102-014-0556-y | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!