Show pageBacklinksCite current pageExport to PDFBack to top This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong. ====== Pituitary apoplexy ====== {{ ::pituitary_apoplexy.jpg?400|}} {{rss>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/rss/search/1lwnZtAkZRl9M5b1e59trykO3hMIGKmUv7bSiand6BXaIWikEs/?limit=15&utm_campaign=pubmed-2&fc=20230701130443}} ---- ---- ===== Definition ===== Pituitary [[apoplexy]] (PA) is a clinical condition characterized by a sudden increase in [[pituitary gland]] volume secondary to [[ischemia]] and/or [[necrosis]]. ===== Key concepts ===== ● due to the expansion of a [[pituitary neuroendocrine tumor]] from hemorrhage or necrosis ● typical presentation: paroxysmal H/A with endocrinologic and/or neurologic deficit (usually [[ophthalmoplegia]] or [[visual loss]]) ● management: immediate administration of [[glucocorticoid]]s, and transsphenoidal decompression within 7 days in most cases. ===== Epidemiology ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy epidemiology]]. ===== Classification ===== It is important to note that pituitary apoplexy may be divided into hemorrhagic or ischemic, each with unique neuroimaging findings. ===== Etiology ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy etiology]]. ===== Pathophysiology ===== Some postulate that a gradual enlarging pituitary tumor becomes impacted at the diaphragmatic notch, compressing and distorting the hypophyseal stalk and its vascular supply. This deprives the anterior pituitary gland and the tumor itself of its vascular supply, apoplectically causing ischemia and subsequent necrosis. Another theory stipulates that rapid expansion of the tumor outstrips its vascular supply, resulting in ischemia and necrosis. This explanation is doubtful, since most tumors that undergo apoplexy are slow growing. Cerebral ischemia due to pituitary apoplexy is very rare. It may be caused by [[vasospasm]] or direct compression of cerebral vessels by the tumor. ===== Clinical features ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy clinical features]]. ===== Diagnosis ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy diagnosis]]. ===== Differential diagnosis ===== Seung et al., present an unusual case of [[bitemporal hemianopsia]] caused by a large [[anterior communicating artery aneurysm]]. A 41-year-old woman was admitted to our neurosurgical department with a sudden-onset bursting headache and visual impairment. On admission, her vision was decreased to finger counting at 30 cm in the left eye and 50 cm in the right eye, and a severe bitemporal hemianopsia was demonstrated on visual field testing. A brain computed tomography scan revealed a subarachnoid hemorrhage at the basal cistern, and conventional cerebral catheter angiography of the left internal carotid artery demonstrated an 18×8 mm dumbbell-shaped aneurysm at the ACoA. Microscopic aneurysmal clipping was performed. An ACoA aneurysm can produce visual field defects by compressing the optic chiasm or nerves. Seung et al., emphasize that it is important to diagnose an aneurysm through cerebrovascular study to prevent confusing it with [[pituitary apoplexy]] ((Seung WB, Kim DY, Park YS. A Large Ruptured Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysm Presenting with Bitemporal Hemianopsia. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2015 Sep;58(3):291-3. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2015.58.3.291. Epub 2015 Sep 30. PubMed PMID: 26539276; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4630364. )). ---- A 52-year-old woman, previously diagnosed with asymptomatic [[Rathke cleft cyst]] (RCC), came with a severe headache, along with visual dysfunction and symptoms of [[pituitary]] insufficiency. Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated diffuse hyperintensity in the cerebral cisterns, whereas watery clear cerebrospinal fluid was obtained by lumbar puncture. Surgery performed 1 month after onset revealed a nonhemorrhagic lesion, with a final diagnosis of nonhemorrhagic RCC rupture. Yokota et al., conclude that nonhemorrhagic RCC rupture and subsequent leakage of the contents into subarachnoid space were the underlying pathogenesis in the present case of RCC resembling apoplexy ((Yokota H, Ida Y, Wajima D, Nishimura F, Nakase H. Rathke Cleft Cyst with Evidence of Rupture into Subarachnoid Space. World Neurosurg. 2016 Oct 21. pii: S1878-8750(16)31061-0. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.10.072. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 27777166. )). ===== Treatment ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy treatment]]. ===== Outcome ===== see [[Pituitary apoplexy outcome]]. ===== Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ===== In a [[Systematic Review]] and [[Meta-Analysis]], Xia et al., from the First College of Clinical Medical Science, Three Gorges University & Yichang Central People's Hospital, [[Yichang]], Hubei, China, published in [[Frontiers in Surgery]]. The [[author]]s compared [[recovery]] outcomes of neurosurgical vs. [[conservative treatment]] in [[patient]]s with [[pituitary apoplexy]], aiming to provide [[evidence]]-based [[guidance]] for clinical [[decision-making]]. [[Recovery]] from [[ophthalmoplegia]] improved wih surgery ((Xia K, Peng J, Zhou Y, Liu X, Chen H, Xu H, Wang S, Deng A, Tang H, Hu J. Pituitary apoplexy: surgical or conservative? A meta-analytical insight. Front Surg. 2025 Jun 4;12:1579498. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1579498. PMID: 40535550; PMCID: PMC12174462.)). ---- The authors claim to provide evidence-based guidance for choosing between surgical and conservative treatment in pituitary apoplexy through a [[meta-analysis]] of 33 years of literature. ---- **They conclude that surgery significantly improves ocular muscle paralysis but yields no benefit over conservative management for [[visual acuity]], [[visual field]], or [[endocrine]] outcomes.** 💣 Critical Issues 1. Methodological Superficiality Despite claiming a rigorous meta-analysis, the study relies on a fixed-effects model—a questionable choice given the expected heterogeneity across decades of heterogeneous, mostly retrospective, observational studies. This choice artificially narrows [[confidence interval]]s and potentially overstates [[precision]]. No rationale is given for not using a [[random-effects model]], which is standard in clinical meta-analyses dealing with variable populations and treatment protocols. 2. Garbage In, Garbage Out The meta-analysis is built on decades of low-quality, non-randomized studies, many of them [[case series]] with unclear [[bias]] control, inconsistent definitions of "conservative" treatment, and widely varying follow-up times. Combining these into a single pooled analysis under the guise of scientific rigor is like mixing sand with water and calling it wine. 3. Selective Focus on One Endpoint The only statistically significant result is improved recovery from ocular [[palsy]], a relatively uncommon but visually dramatic symptom. However, this endpoint is cherry-picked from multiple comparisons. The authors fail to correct for multiple testing, raising the possibility of false-positive significance (Type I error). Meanwhile, more clinically impactful outcomes like vision and endocrine function show no benefit from surgery, which the authors conveniently downplay. 4. No Functional or Quality-of-Life Assessment The study ignores patient-centered outcomes like return to work, [[quality of life]], or long-term [[disability]], which are highly relevant in pituitary apoplexy. This omission renders the analysis clinically superficial and primarily academic. 5. Chinese Academic Inflation All authors hail from a single academic complex in [[Yichang]], China. While that is not a flaw per se, the lack of international [[collaboration]], [[external validation]], or patient-level data undermines [[generalizability]]. Moreover, the article is filled with [[buzzword]]s (“evidence-based”, “systematic”) that mask the absence of real clinical insight. 🧨 Bottom Line This is a meta-analysis in form, not substance. It offers no meaningful advancement in [[pituitary apoplexy managemet]] and risks misleading clinicians with overstated conclusions based on underpowered and methodologically fragile data. The statistically significant finding regarding ocular palsy feels more like an artifact of analytic overreach than a real clinical truth. 💬 Suggested Reframing The study should be read not as a [[guide]], but as a cautionary tale: how a meta-analysis can be used to create a false aura of certainty in an area still in desperate need of high-quality, prospective, controlled studies. ===== Case series ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy case series]]. ===== Case reports ===== [[Pituitary apoplexy case reports]]. ===== Pituitary apoplexy in Dogs ===== Nineteen cases of suspected [[Pituitary apoplexy]] were included. The majority of [[dog]]s showed behavioural abnormalities (11/19). Neurological [[sign]]s more frequently identified were [[obtundation]] (7/19), vestibular signs (7/19) and [[epileptic seizure]]s (6/19). The onset of neurological signs was per-acute in 14 out of 19 cases. Data regarding CT and MRI were available in 18 and 9 cases, respectively. Neurological signs resolved in less than 24 h in seven patients. The short-term prognosis was defined as favourable in the majority of the study population. The median survival time was of 7 months from the time of PA diagnosis. This is the first description of neurological signs, imaging findings and outcome in a large group of dogs with PA ((Galli G, Bertolini G, Dalla Serra G, Menchetti M. Suspected [[Pituitary Apoplexy]]: Clinical Presentation, Diagnostic [[Imaging]] Findings and [[Outcome]] in 19 [[Dog]]s. Vet Sci. 2022 Apr 15;9(4):191. doi: 10.3390/vetsci9040191. PMID: 35448689.)). ===== References ===== pituitary_apoplexy.txt Last modified: 2025/06/19 14:49by administrador