Surgical Management of Giant Prolactinomas: A Descriptive Study

Introduction. Giant prolactinoma (GP) is a rare pituitary lactotropic cell tumor larger than 4 cm in its widest dimension, and is less likely than a smaller prolactinoma to achieve prolactin normalization on dopamine agonist (DA) monotherapy. There is a paucity of data on the circumstances and outcomes of second-line management of GP with surgery. Herein, our institution’s experience with the surgical management of GPs is described. Methods. A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted of patients who underwent surgery for giant prolactinoma from 2003 to 2018. A chart review was conducted for demographic data, clinical features, laboratory and radiographic findings, operative and pathology reports, perioperative management, and clinical outcomes in follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used. Results. Of 79 prolactinoma cases, 8 patients had GP with a median age of 38 years (range 20–53), 75% (6/8) were male, with a median largest tumor dimension of 6 cm (range 4.6–7.7), and a median prolactin level of 2,500 μg/L (range 100–>13,000). Six patients had transsphenoidal surgery for dopamine agonist (DA) resistance or intolerance. Two patients had a craniotomy for a missed diagnosis; one was due to the hook effect. No tumor resections were complete by either surgical approach; all had persistent hyperprolactinemia requiring postoperative DA therapy, and two patients had an additional craniotomy procedure for further tumor debulking. There was no recovery of pituitary axes and postoperative deficits were common. Remission as defined by prolactin normalization occurred in 63% (5/8) at a median time of 36 months (range 14–63 months) on DA therapy after surgery with a follow-up of 3–13 years. Conclusions. GPs infrequently require surgical resection, which is generally incomplete and requires adjuvant therapy. Given the rarity of surgery for GPs, multi-institutional or registry studies would yield clearer guidance on optimal management

Curr Diabetes Rev

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes represents an increasing health burden world-wide and its prevalence in particularly higher in elderly population. Consistent epidemiological evidence suggests an increased risk of dementia associated to type 2 diabetes; the mechanisms underlying these associations, however, remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to review epidemiological, clinical and pre-clinical data that weigh on pathophysiological links, mechanisms of disease and associations between type 2 diabetes and dementia to identify areas of opportunity for future research. METHODS: We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: PUBMED, EMBASE, SCIELO, MEDLINE and OVID for clinical, translational and epidemiological research literature that summarize diabetes-related risk factors for dementia, metabolic and neurological changes associated to T2D, evidence of therapeutic approaches in type 2 diabetes and its pathophysiological implications for dementia. RESULTS: Type 2 diabetes mellitus increases risk for all-cause dementia, vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease. The most evaluated mechanisms linking both disorders in pre-clinical studies include an increase in neuronal insulin resistance, impaired insulin signaling, pro-inflammatory state, mitochondrial dysfunction and vascular damage which increase deposition of beta-amyloid, tau proteins and GSK3beta, leading to an earlier onset of dementia in individuals with impairment in the glucose metabolism. Neuroimaging and neuropathology evidence linking cerebrovascular lesions, neurodegeneration and particularly small-vessel disease in the onset of dementia is consistent with the increased risk of incident dementia in type 2 diabetes, but consistent evidence of AD-related pathology is scarce. Epidemiological data shows increased risk of dementia related to hypoglycemic episodes, glycemic control, metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance and genetic predisposition, but the evidence is not consistent and statistical analysis might be affected by inconsistent covariate controlling. Therapeutic approaches for T2D have shown inconsistent result in relation to dementia prevention and delay of cognitive decline; lifestyle intervention, particularly physical activity, is a promising alternative to ameliorate the impact of disability and frailty on T2D-related dementia. CONCLUSION: Vascular disease, inflammation and impaired brain insulin signaling might occur in T2D and contribute to dementia risk. Evidence from epidemiological studies has not consistently reported associations that could integrate a unified mechanism of disease in humans. Evaluation of the effect of antidiabetic medications and non-pharmacological interventions in dementia prevention in type 2 diabetes is promising but has thus far offered inconsistent results