Adrenocorticotropic Hormone–Stimulated Adrenal Venous Sampling Underestimates Surgically Curable Primary Aldosteronism: A Retrospective Cohort Study and Review of Contemporary Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guidelines recommend adrenal venous sampling to determine disease laterality in primary aldosteronism. Adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation clearly improves the likelihood of successful adrenal vein catheterization but may lead to a decrease in lateralization rates. To examine the impact of ACTH on lateralization, we performed a retrospective analysis of 340 patients with confirmed primary aldosteronism who underwent adrenal venous sampling with a single interventional radiology team using a protocol of sampling both before and after an ACTH bolus. In addition to this original research, we conducted a review of similar studies from the past 5 years to develop a consensus on the impact of ACTH on lateralization for primary aldosteronism. In the original research analysis, following a bolus of ACTH, 58% of patients had a decline in lateralization index which led to discordance between the pre-ACTH and post-ACTH classifications of lateralization in up to 26% of cases. The majority of discordant cases were due to reclassification from unilateral disease pre-ACTH to bilateral disease post-ACTH. In patients who already lateralized with unstimulated sampling, the response to ACTH did not have any impact on surgical outcomes. In a review of contemporary studies, we identified 11 similar studies in the past 5 years, of which 10 reported either no change or a decrease in lateralization index following ACTH, resulting in ≈25% discordance between unstimulated and stimulated lateralization rates. We conclude that ACTH stimulation during adrenal venous sampling can underestimate surgically remediable primary aldosteronism and recommend that the role of ACTH be limited primarily to enhancing selectivity.
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 | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".