| Literature DB >> 30425741 |
Elina Peltola1,2, Päivi Hannula3, Heini Huhtala4, Saara Metso3, Ulla Kiviniemi3, Martine Vornanen5, Juhani Sand6, Johanna Laukkarinen1,7, Mirja Tiikkainen8, Camilla Schalin-Jäntti8,9, Johanna Arola10,11, Jukka Sirén12, Antti Piiroinen13, Minna Soinio14, Pirjo Nuutila13,14, Mirva Söderström15, Hanna Hämäläinen16, Leena Moilanen17, David Laaksonen17, Elina Pirinen18, Fia Sundelin19, Tapani Ebeling19,20, Pasi Salmela20, Markus J Mäkinen21,22, Pia Jaatinen1,2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Insulinomas are rare pancreatic tumours. Population-based data on their incidence, clinical picture, diagnosis, and treatment are almost nonexistent. The aim of this study was to clarify these aspects in a nationwide cohort of insulinoma patients diagnosed during three decades. DESIGN AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis on all adult patients diagnosed with insulinoma in Finland during 1980-2010.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30425741 PMCID: PMC6218736 DOI: 10.1155/2018/2059481
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Endocrinol ISSN: 1687-8337 Impact factor: 3.257
The criteria for endogenous hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia according to the Endocrine Society Guideline 2009 [7].
| Symptoms and signs, or both, consistent with hypoglycemia with concomitant plasma concentrations of | |
|---|---|
| Glucose | <3.0 mmol/l |
| Insulin | ≥18 pmol/l |
| C-Peptide | ≥0.2 nmol/l |
| Proinsulin | ≥5.0 pmol/l |
Figure 1The incidence of insulinomas in Finland 1980–2010. In Poisson regression analysis, the yearly incidence rate ratio was 1.043, and the increase in incidence was statistically significant (p = 0.002).
The presenting symptoms of the 79 patients diagnosed with an insulinoma in Finland 1980–2010.
| Symptom |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Autonomic symptoms | 61 | 77 |
| Sweating/diaphoresis | 45 | 57 |
| Tremor | 21 | 27 |
| Anxiety, aggressiveness | 16 | 20 |
| Palpitations | 14 | 18 |
| Neuroglycopenic symptoms | 76 | 96 |
| Confusion | 68 | 86 |
| Drowsiness | 46 | 58 |
| Visual disturbances | 41 | 52 |
| Amnesia | 35 | 44 |
| Unconsciousness | 36 | 46 |
| Lightheadedness | 26 | 33 |
| Hunger | 24 | 30 |
| Paresthesias | 20 | 25 |
| Headache | 16 | 20 |
| Seizures | 15 | 19 |
The imaging methods used and their sensitivities in the localization of insulinomas in Finland 1980–2010.
| Localizing method | 1980–1989 ( | 1990–1999 ( | 2000–2010 ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ratioa | % | Ratio | % | Ratio | % | |
| Abdominal US | 1/12 | 8 | 1/12 | 8 | 4/11 | 36 |
| Angiography | 3/14 | 21 | 3/9 | 33 | 7/11 | 64 |
| CT scan | 1/17 | 6 | 3/17 | 17 | 19/37 | 51 |
| EUS | NA | 4/6 | 67 | 14/17 | 82 | |
| ERCP | 0 | 0 | 0/2 | 0 | NA | |
| MRCP | NA | NA | 1/1 | 100 | ||
| MRI | NA | 2/6 | 33 | 12/22 | 55 | |
| Octreotide scintigraphy | NA | 2/6 | 33 | 1/9 | 11 | |
| THPVS | 3/4 | 75 | NA | NA | ||
| 18F-DOPA-PET/CT | NA | 0/1 | 0 | 11/19 | 58 | |
| 18F-FDG-PET/CT | NA | NA | 0/1 | 0 | ||
| Overall detection | 7/18 | 39 | 10/18 | 56 | 42/43 | 98 |
aRatio indicates the proportion of patients in whom the imaging method was successful in localizing the insulinoma. US indicates ultrasonography; CT: computed tomography; EUS: endoscopic ultrasonography; ERCP: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; MRCP: magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging; THPVS: transhepatic portovenous sampling; 18F-DOPA-PET: 18F-dihydroxyphenylalanine positron emission tomography; 18F-FDG-PET: 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography; NA: not applicable.
Surgical treatment of insulinoma patients in Finland 1980–2010.
| Surgical procedure | 1980–1989 ( | 1990–1999 ( | 2000–2010 ( | Total ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % |
| % |
| % | |
| Tumour enucleation | 4 | 31 | 11 | 58 | 16 | 39 | 31 | 43 |
| Distal resection | 8 | 61 | 5 | 26 | 20 | 49 | 33 | 45 |
| Pancreaticoduodenectomy | 1 | 8 | 3 | 16 | 5 | 12 | 9 | 12 |
Figure 2Postoperative overall complications graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification [20, 21] in the 73 insulinoma patients operated in Finland 1980–2010. aComplication grade (0–V) according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, where 0 indicates no complications and V indicates death of the patient. There was no statistically significant difference in the Clavien-Dindo grades between the surgical methods (p = 0.218, Fisher exact test).