Advertisement

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

, Volume 394, Issue 5, pp 843–849 | Cite as

Evaluation of Halle, Miami, Rome, and Vienna intraoperative iPTH assay criteria in guiding minimally invasive parathyroidectomy

  • Marcin Barczynski
  • Aleksander Konturek
  • Alicja Hubalewska-Dydejczyk
  • Stanislaw Cichon
  • Wojciech Nowak
Endocrine Surgery

Abstract

Background and aims

Intraoperative parathyroid hormone assay (IOPTH) has been used during minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) to predict operative success. However, the applied criteria are not equivalent in detection of multiglandular disease (MGD) and predicting cure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the most commonly applied criteria of IOPTH in patients undergoing MIP in a tertiary referral center.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review of 260 patients with sporadic primary hyperparathyroidism and concordant results of sestamibi scanning and ultrasound of the neck undergoing MIP (135 video-assisted and 125 open) between Dec 2002 and May 2008, with a 6-month postoperative follow-up of intact parathyroid hormone and serum calcium levels, was performed. The main outcome measures included evaluation of predictive values of Halle, Miami, Rome, and Vienna IOPTH interpretation criteria.

Results

The following overall accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values were found, respectively: 65%, 62.9%, 100%, 100%, and 14.2% for Halle criterion; 97.3%, 97.6%, 93.3%, 99.6%, and 70% for Miami criterion; 83.8%, 82,9%, 100%, 100%, and 26.3% for Rome criterion; and 92.3%, 92.2%, 93.3%, 99.6%, and 60.9% for Vienna criterion.

Conclusions

Miami criterion followed by Vienna criterion was found to be the best balanced among other criteria, with the highest accuracy in intraoperative prediction of cure. However, Rome criterion followed by Halle criterion was found to be the most useful in intraoperative detection of MGD. Nevertheless, their application in patients qualified for MIP with concordant results of sestamibi scanning and ultrasound of the neck would result in a significantly higher number of negative conversions to bilateral neck explorations and only a marginal improvement in the success rate of primary operations.

Keywords

Sporadic primary hyperparathyroidism Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy Intraoperative parathyroid hormone assay Multiglandular disease Predictive value 

References

  1. 1.
    Irvin GL III, Solorzano CC, Carneiro DM (2004) Quick intraoperative parathyroid hormone assay: surgical adjunct to allow limited parathyroidectomy, improve success rate, and predict outcome. World J Surg 28:1287–1292. doi: 10.1007/s00268-004-7708-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Caneiro DM, Irvin GL III (2000) Late parathyroid function after successful parathyroidectomy guided by intraoperative hormone assay (QPTH) compared with the standard bilateral neck exploration. Surgery 128:925–929. doi: 10.1067/msy.2000.109964 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carter AB, Howanitz PJ (2003) Intraoperative testing for parathyroid hormone: a comprehensive review of the use of the assay and the relevant literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med 127:1424–1442PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lew JI, Solorzano CC, Montano RE, Carneiro-Pla DM, Irvin GL III (2008) Role of intraoperative parathormone monitoring during parathyroidectomy in patients with discordant localization studies. Surgery 144:299–306. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2008.03.039 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gawande AA, Monchik JM, Abbruzzese TA, Iannuccilli JD, Ibrahim SI, Moore FD Jr (2006) Reassessment of parathyroid hormone monitoring during parathyroidectomy for primary hyperparathyroidism after 2 preoperative localization studies. Arch Surg 141:381–384. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.141.4.381 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miccoli P, Berti P, Materazzi G, Massi M, Picone A, Minuto MN (2004) Results of video-assisted parathyroidectomy: single institution’s six-year experience. World J Surg 28:1216–1218. doi: 10.1007/s00268-004-7638-3 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Udelsman R, Donovan P (2004) Open minimally invasive parathyroid surgery. World J Surg 28:1224–1226. doi: 10.1007/s00268-004-7600-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barczynski M, Cichon S, Konturek A, Cichon W (2006) Minimally invasive video-assisted parathyroidectomy vs. open minimally invasive parathyroidectomy for a solitary parathyroid adenoma: a prospective, randomized, blinded trial. World J Surg 30:721–731. doi: 10.1007/s00268-005-0312-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grant CS, Thompson G, Farley D, van Heerden J (2005) Primary hyperparathyroidism surgical management since the introduction of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy: Mayo Clinic Experience. Arch Surg 140:472–480. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.140.5.472 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGill J, Sturgeon C, Kaplan SP, Chiu B, Kaplan EL, Angelos P (2008) How does the operative strategy for primary hyperparathyroidism impact the findings and cure rate? A comparison of 800 parathyroidectomies. J Am Coll Surg 207:246–249. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.01.066 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sackett WR, Barraclough B, Reeve TS, Delbridge LW (2002) Worldwide trends in the surgical treatment of primary hyperparathyroidism in the era of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy. Arch Surg 137:1055–1059. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.137.9.1055 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Caneiro DM, Solorzano CC, Nader MC, Ramirez M, Irvin GL III (2003) Comparison of intraoperative iPTH assay (QPTH) criteria in guiding parathyroidectomy: which criterion is the most accurate? Surgery 134:973–979. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2003.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gauger PG, Mullan MH, Thompson NW, Doherty GM, Matz KA, England BG (2004) An alternative analysis of intraoperative parathyroid hormone data may improve the ability to detect multiglandular disease. Arch Surg 139:164–169. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.139.2.164 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lombardi CP, Rafaelli M, Traini E, Di Stasio E, Carrozza C, De Crea C, Zuppi C, Bellantone R (2008) Intraoperative PTH monitoring during parathyroidectomy: the need for stricter criteria to detect multiglandular disease. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393:639–645. doi: 10.1007/s00423-008-0384-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Riss P, Kaczirek K, Heinz G, Biglmayer C, Niederle B (2007) A “defined baseline” in PTH monitoring increases surgical success in patients with multiple gland disease. Surgery 142:398–404. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.05.004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chiu B, Sturgeon C, Angelos P (2006) Which intraoperative parathyroid hormone assay criterion best predicts operative success? A study of 352 consecutive patients. Arch Surg 141:483–488. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.141.5.483 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sugg SL, Krzywda EA, Demeure MJ, Wilson SD (2004) Detection of multiple gland primary hyperparathyroidism in the era of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy. Surgery 136:1303–1309. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2004.06.062 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weber KJ, Misra S, Lee JK, Wilhelm SW, DeCresce R, Prinz RA (2004) Intraoperative PTH monitoring in parathyroid hyperplasia requires stricter criteria for success. Surgery 136:1154–1159. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2004.05.060 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Siperstein A, Berber E, Barbosa GF, Tsinberg M, Greene AB, Mitchell J, Milas M (2008) Predicting the success of limited exploration for primary hyperparathyroidism using ultrasound, sestamibi, and intraoperative parathyroid hormone: analysis of 1158 cases. Ann Surg 248:420–428PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carneiro-Pla DM, Solorzano CC, Irvin GL III (2006) Consequences of targeted parathyroidectomy guided by localization studies without intraoperative parathyroid hormone monitoring. J Am Coll Surg 202:715–722. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.02.003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stalberg P, Sidhy S, Sywak M, Robinson B, Wilkinson M, Delbridge L (2006) Intraoperative parathyroid hormone measurement during minimally invasive parathyroidectomy: does it “value-add” to decision-making? J Am Coll Surg 203:1–6. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.03.022 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barczynski M, Konturek A, Cichon S, Hubalewska-Dydejczyk A, Golkowski F, Huszno B (2007) Intraoperative parathyroid hormone assay improves outcomes of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy mainly in patients with a presumed solitary parathyroid adenoma and missing concordance of preoperative imaging. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 66:878–885. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2265.2007.02827.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zettinig G, Kurtaran A, Prager G, Kaserer K, Dudczak R, Niederle B (2002) “Suppressed” double adenoma—a rare pitfall in minimally invasive parathyroidectomy. Horm Res 57:57–60. doi: 10.1159/000057949 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Riss P, Kaczirek K, Bieglmayer C, Niederle B (2007) PTH spikes during parathyroid exploration—a possible pitfall during PTH monitoring? Langenbecks Arch Surg 392:427–430. doi: 10.1007/s00423-006-0125-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcin Barczynski
    • 1
  • Aleksander Konturek
    • 1
  • Alicja Hubalewska-Dydejczyk
    • 2
  • Stanislaw Cichon
    • 1
  • Wojciech Nowak
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Endocrine Surgery, 3rd Chair of General SurgeryJagiellonian University College of MedicineKrakowPoland
  2. 2.Department of EndocrinologyJagiellonian University College of MedicineKrakowPoland

Personalised recommendations