The Shape grading system: a classification for growth patterns of pituitary adenomas.

BACKGROUND: Long-term tumor control of pituitary adenomas may be achieved by gross total resection (GTR). Factors, which influence the extent of resection, are invasiveness, tumor size, and possibly tumor shape. Nevertheless, the latter factor has not been assessed so far and there is no classification for the different shapes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of different tumor shapes on GTR rates and outcome according to our proposed "Shape grading system." METHODS: In this retrospective single center study, the radiological outcome of nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas was assessed with respect to the following previously defined growth patterns: spherical (Shape I), oval (Shape II), dumbbell (Shape III), mushroom (Shape IV), and polylobulated (Shape V). RESULTS: A total of 191 patients were included (Shape I, n = 28 (15%); Shape II, n = 91 (48%); Shape III, n = 37 (19%); Shape IV, n = 12 (6%); Shape V, n = 23 (12%)). GTR was achieved in 101 patients (53%) with decreasing likelihood of GTR in higher shape grades (Shape I, n = 23 (82%); Shape II, n = 67 (74%); Shape III, n = 9 (24%); Shape IV, n = 2 (17%); Shape V, n = 0 (0%)). This correlated with larger tumor remnants, a higher risk of tumor recurrence/regrowth and therefore necessity of re-surgery and/or radiotherapy/radiosurgery. CONCLUSION: The "Shape grading system" may be used as a predictor of the outcome in nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas. The higher the "Shape grade," the higher the likelihood for lower GTR rates, larger tumor remnants, and need for further therapies.

Celiac Disease is Misdiagnosed Based on Serology Only in a Substantial Proportion of Patients.

BACKGROUND: Although the diagnostic process in celiac disease (CeD) has been addressed in several international guidelines, little is known about the actual proceeding in current clinical practice. This study investigated the initial presentation, the diagnostic process, follow-up evaluations, and adherence to a gluten-free diet in CeD patients in a real-life setting in Switzerland from a patient's perspective. METHODS: We performed a large patient survey among unselected CeD patients in Switzerland. RESULTS: A total of 1689 patients were analyzed. The vast majority complained of both gastrointestinal and nonspecific symptoms (71.5%), whereas 1.8% reported an asymptomatic disease course. A total of 35.8% CeD patients were diagnosed by a nongastroenterologist. The diagnostic process differed between nongastroenterologists and gastroenterologists, with the latter more often using duodenal biopsy alone or in combination with serology (94.7% vs. 63.0%) and nongastroenterologists more frequently establishing the diagnosis without endoscopy (37.0% vs. 5.3%, P<0.001). Follow-up serology after 6 months was performed only in half of all patients (49.4%), whereas 69.9% had at least 1 follow-up serology within the first year after diet initiation. About 39.7% had a follow-up endoscopy with duodenal biopsies (after a median of 12 mo; range, 1 to 600 mo). The likelihood of receiving any follow-up examination was higher in patients initially diagnosed by a gastroenterologist. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of CeD patients are diagnosed by nongastroenterologists. Under the diagnostic lead of the latter, more than a third of the patients receive their diagnosis on the basis of a positive serology and/or genetics only, in evident violation of current diagnostic guidelines, which may lead to an overdiagnosis of this entity.

The perspective of celiac disease patients on emerging treatment options and non-celiac gluten sensitivity.

BACKGROUND: Non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) and emerging treatment options are hot topics in the celiac disease (CeD) scientific literature. However, very little is known about the perspective on these issues of CeD patients. METHODS: We performed a large patient survey among unselected CeD patients in Switzerland. RESULTS: A total of 1689 patients were analyzed. 57.5% have previously heard of NCGS. 64.5% believe in the existence of this entity. Regarding a potential influence of NCGS on CeD awareness, 31.7% show a positive and 27.5% a negative perception. Patients with prior use of alternative medicine and women more often have heard of and believe in the existence of NCGS vs. those never having used alternative methods and men, respectively (66.9 vs. 56.9%, p=0.001 and 78.5 vs. 69.0%, p=0.001; 60.7 vs. 44.2%, p<0.001 and 71.0 vs. 60.8%, p=0.002). Women and patients ≥30 years more often show a negative attitude towards NCGS (32.2% vs. 24.8%, p=0.024 and 32.2% vs. 24.2%, p=0.018). With regard to emerging treatment options for CeD, 43.3% have previously heard of novel agents, more women than men (46.0 vs. 38.0%, p=0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Perception of and attitude towards NCGS differ depending on sex, age and prior use of alternative medicine. Knowledge of the progress towards emerging treatment options is currently limited.