Endoscopic Transphenoidal Surgery for Acromegaly Improves Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acromegaly has important effects on quality of life (QOL). This is the first study to measure QOL in acromegalic patients after endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (ETSS). METHODS: We prospectively collected the RAND-36, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D), and Pituitary QOL validated questionnaires and patients' demographics, clinical presentation, endocrine laboratory results, radiological studies, development of complications and remission rates from 20 consecutive acromegalic patients who had undergone endoscopic transphenoidal surgery. RESULTS: The eleven females and nine males had an average age of 42 years; 90 percent had macroadenomas and 70% had cavernous sinus invasion on their preoperative imaging. Ninety percent had improved symptoms post-operatively and 80% stated that treatment improved their QOL. Biochemically, 35% were cured, 35% had discordant results and 30% were not cured, while pan-hypopituitarism occurred in 4 patients. Physical health subscales and pituitary-related symptoms were similar to norms. "Social," "emotional health," and "energy levels" were significantly lower than norms. Seventy percent stated that their relationship with their physician "very much so" affected their quality of life. Pan hypopituitarism and adjuvant therapy were the most significant predictors of lower QOL subscale scores. CONCLUSION: Transsphenoidal surgery improves QOL in acromegaly. Attempts to achieve a cure, avoidance of surgically induced pan-hypotpituitarism and adjuvant therapy, will improve quality of life. Our study demonstrates the important role of the patient-physician relationship to QOL and the need to measure QOL in addition to the traditional measures of outcome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".