RESUMEN
ABSTRACT Objective: Despite its recognized importance, primary hyperaldosteronism (PHA) remains an underdiagnosed condition in clinical practice. The objective of the present study was to evaluate PHA screening practices by general practitioners and specialists in endocrinology and cardiology. Subjects and methods: This cross-sectional, observational study invited physicians to respond voluntarily to an online survey. The survey collected the respondents' sociodemographic data and answers to five hypothetical clinical cases meeting Endocrine Society criteria for PHA screening. Results: In all, 126 physicians responded to the online survey. Endocrinologists were the specialists who most often chose PHA screening, although the screening rates were overall low, ranging from 36.5% to 92.9%, depending on the case and the respondents' specialty. The survey also assessed the reasons for not choosing PHA screening, which included limited availability of tests within the public health services, interference of antihypertensive medications on hormone levels, and failure to identify the screening indication. Being an endocrinologist was an independent predictor for choosing PHA screening for the patients in Cases #1 and #5 (p = 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively). Conclusion: Endocrinologists were the specialists who most often chose PHA screening, although the screening rates were overall low among all specialists. These findings highlight a need for continuing medical education programs addressing PHA screening and making the diagnosis of PHA more present in the daily clinical practice of physicians treating patients with hypertension.
RESUMEN
We present four FIPA kindred discussing clinical and molecular data and emphasizing the differences regarding AIP status, as well as the importance of genetic screening. Family 1 consists of five patients harboring somatotropinomas with germline E24X mutation in AIP. In one of the patients, acromegaly was diagnosed through active screening, being cured by surgery. Families 2 and 3 are composed of two patients with non-functioning pituitary adenomas. Family 4 comprises patients harboring a prolactinoma and a somatotropinoma. No mutations in AIP were found in these families. No patient in Family 1 was controlled with octreotide treatment, while the acromegalic patient in Family 4 was controlled with octreotide LAR. In conclusion, FIPA is a heterogeneous condition, which may be associated with AIP mutation. Genomic and clinical screening is recommended in families with two or more members harboring pituitary adenomas, allowing early diagnosis and better outcome.
Apresentamos dados clínicos e moleculares de quatro famílias com adenoma hipofisário familiar isolado (FIPA) enfatizando as diferenças na presença ou não de mutação do AIP e a importância da triagem genética. A Família 1 é composta por cinco pacientes portadores de somatotropinomas com mutação germinativa E24X no AIP. Um dos pacientes foi diagnosticado por meio de rastreio ativo, com cura cirúrgica. As Famílias 2 e 3 apresentam em sua composição dois pacientes com adenomas hipofisários não funcionantes. A Família 4 compreende dois pacientes, um com prolactinoma e outro com somatotropinoma. Não foi encontrada mutação no AIP nessas famílias. Na Família 1, não houve resposta ao octreotide, enquanto o paciente acromegálico da Família 4 foi controlado com a medicação. Em conclusão, a FIPA é uma condição heterogênea que pode estar associada à mutação do AIP e o rastreio genético/clínico é recomendado nas famílias com dois ou mais membros portadores de adenoma hipofisário. Isso permite um diagnóstico precoce, com melhor prognóstico.