Search Results
Search for other papers by M Cherenko in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N M Appelman-Dijkstra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A L Priego Zurita in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N R Biermasz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by O M Dekkers in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by F A Klok in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N Reisch in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Aulinas in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by B Biagetti in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by S Cannavo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by L Canu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by M Detomas in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by F Devuyst in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by H Falhammar in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by R A Feelders in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by F Ferrau in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by F Gatto in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by C Grasselli in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by P van Houten in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by C Hoybye in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A M Isidori in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Kyrilli in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by P Loli in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by D Maiter in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by E Nowak in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by R Pivonello in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by O Ragnarsson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by R V Steenaard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N Unger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A van de Ven in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by S M Webb in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by D Yeste in
Google Scholar
PubMed
University of Glasgow, Office for Rare Conditions, Glasgow, UK
University of Glasgow, Developmental Endocrinology Research Group, Royal Hospital for Children, Glasgow, UK
Search for other papers by S F Ahmed in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A M Pereira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background
Patients with Cushing syndrome (CS) are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE).
Objective
The aim was to evaluate the current management of new cases of CS with a focus on VTE and thromboprophylaxis.
Design and methods
A survey was conducted within those that report in the electronic reporting tool (e-REC) of the European Registries for Rare Endocrine Conditions (EuRRECa) and the involved main thematic groups (MTG’s) of the European Reference Networks for Rare Endocrine Disorders (Endo-ERN) on new patients with CS from January 2021 to July 2022.
Results
Of 222 patients (mean age 44 years, 165 females), 141 patients had Cushing disease (64%), 69 adrenal CS (31%), and 12 patients with ectopic CS (5.4%). The mean follow-up period post-CS diagnosis was 15 months (range 3–30). Cortisol-lowering medications were initiated in 38% of patients. One hundred fifty-four patients (69%) received thromboprophylaxis (including patients on chronic anticoagulant treatment), of which low-molecular-weight heparins were used in 96% of cases. VTE was reported in six patients (2.7%), of which one was fatal: two long before CS diagnosis, two between diagnosis and surgery, and two postoperatively. Three patients were using thromboprophylaxis at time of the VTE diagnosis. The incidence rate of VTE in patients after Cushing syndrome diagnosis in our study cohort was 14.6 (95% CI 5.5; 38.6) per 1000 person-years.
Conclusion
Thirty percent of patients with CS did not receive preoperative thromboprophylaxis during their active disease stage, and half of the VTE cases even occurred during this stage despite thromboprophylaxis. Prospective trials to establish the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy in CS patients are highly needed.
Significance statement
The incidence rate of venous thromboembolism in our study cohort was 14.6 (95% CI 5.5; 38.6) per 1000 person-years. Notably, this survey showed that there is great heterogeneity regarding time of initiation and duration of thromboprophylaxis in expert centers throughout Europe.
Office for Rare Conditions, Royal Hospital for Children & Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
Search for other papers by S R Ali in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by J Bryce in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A L Priego-Zurita in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by M Cherenko in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by C Smythe in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by T M de Rooij in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Paediatric Endocrinology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
Search for other papers by M Cools in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by T Danne in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by H Katugampola in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Medicine & Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
Search for other papers by O M Dekkers in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by O Hiort in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Linglart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by I Netchine in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Nordenstrom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by P Attila in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
Search for other papers by L Persani in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N Reisch in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Smyth in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Z Sumnik in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by D Taruscio in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by W E Visser in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology and Metabolism, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Search for other papers by A M Pereira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N M Appelman-Dijkstra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Office for Rare Conditions, Royal Hospital for Children & Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK
Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
Search for other papers by S F Ahmed in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Objective
The European Registries for Rare Endocrine Conditions (EuRRECa, eurreb.eu) includes an e-reporting registry (e-REC) used to perform surveillance of conditions within the European Reference Network (ERN) for rare endocrine conditions (Endo-ERN). The aim of this study was to report the experience of e-REC over the 3.5 years since its launch in 2018.
Methods
Electronic reporting capturing new encounters of Endo-ERN conditions was performed monthly through a bespoke platform by clinicians registered to participate in e-REC from July 2018 to December 2021.
Results
The number of centres reporting on e-REC increased to a total of 61 centres from 22 countries. A median of 29 (range 11, 45) paediatric and 32 (14, 51) adult centres had reported cases monthly. A total of 9715 and 4243 new cases were reported in adults (age ≥18 years) and children, respectively. In children, sex development conditions comprised 40% of all reported conditions and transgender cases were most frequently reported, comprising 58% of sex development conditions. The median number of sex development cases reported per centre per month was 0.6 (0, 38). Amongst adults, pituitary conditions comprised 44% of reported conditions and pituitary adenomas (69% of cases) were most commonly reported. The median number of pituitary cases reported per centre per month was 4 (0.4, 33).
Conclusions
e-REC has gained increasing acceptability over the last 3.5 years for capturing brief information on new encounters of rare conditions and shows wide variations in the rate of presentation of these conditions to centres within a reference network.
Significance statement
Endocrinology includes a very wide range of rare conditions and their occurrence is often difficult to measure. By using an electronic platform that allowed monthly reporting of new clinical encounters of several rare endocrine conditions within a defined network that consisted of several reference centres in Europe, the EuRRECa project shows that a programme of e-surveillance is feasible and acceptable. The data that have been collected by the e-reporting of rare endocrine conditions (e-REC) can allow the continuous monitoring of rare conditions and may be used for clinical benchmarking, designing new studies or recruiting to clinical trials.
Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology and Centre for Endocrine Tumors, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
Department of Neurosurgery, University Neurosurgical Centre Holland (UNCH), Leiden University Medical Centre, Haaglanden Medical Centre and Haga Teaching Hospitals, Leiden and The Hague, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Merel van der Meulen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ana Luisa Priego Zurita in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by S Faisal Ahmed in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Wouter R van Furth in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Evangelia Charmandari in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Olaf Hiort in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alberto M Pereira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mehul Dattani in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Diana Vitali in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Johan P de Graaf in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Nienke R Biermasz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Objective
The European Reference Network on Rare Endocrine Conditions (Endo-ERN) aims to organize high-quality healthcare throughout Europe, including care for pituitary adenoma patients. As surgery is the mainstay of treatment, we aimed to describe the current surgical practice and published surgical outcomes of pituitary adenoma within Endo-ERN.
Design and Methods
Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting surgical outcomes of pituitary adenoma patients within Endo-ERN MTG6 pituitary reference centers between 2010 and 2019. A survey was completed by reference centers on their current surgical practice.
Results
A total of 18 out of 43 (42%) reference centers located in 7 of the 20 (35%) MTG6-represented countries published 48 articles. Remission rates were 50% (95% CI: 42–59) for patients with acromegaly, 68% (95% CI: 60–75) for Cushing’s disease, and 53% (95% CI: 39–66%) for prolactinoma. Gross total resection was achieved in 49% (95% CI: 37–61%) of patients and visual improvement in 78% (95% CI: 68–87). Mortality, hemorrhage, and carotid injury occurred in less than 1% of patients. New-onset hypopituitarism occurred in 16% (95% CI: 11–23), transient diabetes insipidus in 12% (95% CI: 6–21), permanent diabetes insipidus in 4% (95% CI: 3–6), syndrome of inappropriate secretion of antidiuretic hormone (SIADH) in 9% (95% CI: 5–14), severe epistaxis in 2% (95% CI: 0–4), and cerebrospinal fluid leak in 4% (95% CI: 2–6). Thirty-five (81%) centers completed the survey: 54% were operated endoscopically and 57% were together with an ENT surgeon.
Conclusion
The results of this study could be used as a first benchmark for the outcomes of pituitary adenoma surgery within Endo-ERN. However, the heterogeneity between studies in the reporting of outcomes hampers comparability and warrants outcome collection through registries.