PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 3522845

Primary hyperparathyroidism in infancy.

Abstract

Primary hyperparathyroidism in the neonate is a rare and often fatal disorder. These infants typically display severe hypercalcemia, respiratory distress, muscular hypotonia, and skeletal demineralization. They are usually diagnosed within the first three months of life and have hyperplasia of the four parathyroid glands. Twenty-nine infants with primary hyperparathyroidism are reported in the literature. Mortality is 87.5% in medically managed patients and 24% in surgically managed patients. Surgical management has not been satisfactory, in that recurrent hypercalcemia has been encountered in most patients undergoing subtotal parathyroidectomy, and total parathyroidectomy has resulted in the need for lifelong calcium and vitamin D supplementation. We have recently cared for a term newborn female in whom the diagnosis of primary hyperparathyroidism was made clinically on the second day of life, and later was confirmed biochemically. The baby underwent neck exploration on the 11th day of life and was successfully treated with total parathyroidectomy and parathyroid autotransplantation. Although initially rendered eucalcemic, the infant subsequently developed recurrent hypercalcemia requiring the removal of some of the autograft. Currently, the child is more than 2 years following surgery, growing well, and off all medication. The world literature is reviewed in this report of one of the first and the youngest infants, to our knowledge, to undergo parathyroid autotransplantation. In view of its success in avoiding the complication of repeated neck exploration for recurrent hyperparathyroidism or the creation of permanent hypoparathyroidism, we recommend this surgical approach for the rare neonate with primary hyperparathyroidism.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A J Ross, A Cooper, M F Attie, H C Bishop. 1986. Primary hyperparathyroidism in infancy.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3468(86)80219-6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Pathologic diagnosis as the gold standard.

Issues involving brain tumor diagnosis are discussed in light of the frequently observed discrepancies between the diagnoses of general pathologists and neuropathologists. Accuracy of diagnoses could be improved if definitions or criteria for specific categories of tumors were simplified, clearly established, and consensually accepted.

Biopsy

Diagnostic discrepancies and their clinical impact in a neuropathology referral practice.

BACKGROUND: During the course of their neuropathology practice, the authors received cases to review in consultation. In some cases, the patients came to the authors' hospital for therapy; in others, the primary pathologists requested a consultation. Because changes in diagnosis might significantly alter patient management, protocol entry, care costs, or the potential for physician liability, the authors determined the frequency and degrees of their disagreements with the original diagnoses submitted to them. METHODS: The authors reviewed the first 500 brain or spinal cord biopsy cases that were submitted to their neuropathology consultation service for a second opinion in 1995. Disagreements were coded into 10 categories, but were grouped for this analysis as follows: serious (having immediate significance for therapy or intervention), less serious but potentially substantial (calling for a change in type or grade of glioma), minor (adding or deleting information), and those in which the authors made the first diagnosis themselves. RESULTS: There was some degree of disagreement between the original and review diagnoses in 214 (42.8%) of the 500 cases. Disagreements were counted as serious in 44 cases (8.8%), less serious but substantial in 96 cases (19.2%), and minor in 50 cases (10.0%); the authors made the first diagnosis in 24 cases (4.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically important diagnostic errors that can affect immediate patient care decisions occur in a substantial number of brain and spinal cord biopsy cases. Thus, seeking expert neuropathology consultation is prudent and cost-effective for pathologists who are less experienced with these types of cases. Cost savings in case management might result from confirmation of diagnosis before definitive therapy is administered to the patients. The rates of discrepancy between original diagnoses and second opinions in other subspecialties of pathology should be examined.

Biopsy