+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Simultaneous and Bilateral Inferior Petrosal Sinus Sampling for the Diagnosis of Cushing’s Syndrome: Comparison of Multihormonal Assay, Baseline Multiple Sampling and ACTH-Releasing Hormone Test

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          In 29 consecutive patients with adrenocorticotropin (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome, we compared the usefulness of multiple baseline ACTH evaluations (10/29), multiple hormone evaluation (29/29) and ACTH-releasing hormone (CRH) stimulation (21/29) during simultaneous and bilateral inferior petrosal sinus sampling. The basal inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio for ACTH concentrations was greater than 2 in 18 of the 29 patients and CRH challenge caused the appearance of an inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio greater than 3 in 6 other patients. The presence of an ACTH-secreting adenoma was surgically proven in all the 24 patients who had an ACTH inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio greater than 2 basally or greater than 3 after the CRH test but also in 1 patient who had an inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio lower than 2 basally or 3 after the CRH test. In 4 patients, both the very high peripheral ACTH levels, the inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio and the complete lack of ACTH increase after CRH indicated the presence of an ectopic ACTH syndrome: a bronchial carcinoid was found in 2 patients, whereas the site of the tumor is still unknown in the remaining 2. An ACTH intersinus gradient greater than 1.4 was found in 23 patients. Among these 23 patients, the side of the adenoma was correctly predicted in 19 patients and wrongly in 4. In the 10 patients receiving ACTH level evaluation three times before performing the CRH test, no difference of ACTH concentrations was detected in 7 either in the periphery or in inferior petrosal sinuses, while in the remaining 3 patients the ACTH inferior petrosal sinus/periphery ratio became greater than 2 indicating Cushing’s disease. The presence of an intersinus gradient greater than 1.4 for β-endorphin was found basally in 19/29 patients (65.5%) whereas after CRH challenge in 21/29 patients. Moreover, in 4/21 patients (19%) it was clearer than the ACTH intersinus gradient in localizing the pituitary adenoma. Furthermore, in 13 patients a significant intersinus gradient, either basally or after CRH challenge, was found also for GH and/or PRL (44.8%) and in 5 patients for TSH, FSH and/or LH (17.3%). All the 4 patients with proven or suggested ectopic ACTH production had no intersinus gradient for whichever pituitary hormone was considered. In conclusion, the diagnostic accuracy of the inferior petrosal sinus sampling in our series was of 96.5% (28/29 cases) when considering basal and CRH-stimulated ACTH levels in the inferior petrosal sinuses and periphery. On the contrary, the multiple basal ACTH evaluation does not seem to be necessary when CRH is performed during the test, but may be helpful in a minority of cases when CRH test is not available. The multiple hormone evaluation, in particular β-endorphin level assay, might be performed in doubtful cases after the ACTH level determination is obtained, as it can help to indicate the presence of a pituitary microadenoma in the majority of patients.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Horm Res Paediatr
          Hormone Research in Paediatrics
          S. Karger AG
          05 December 2008
          : 40
          : 5-6
          : 209-216
          aDepartment of Medical-Surgical Endocrinology, bInstitute of Radiology and cInstitute of Neurosurgery, ‘Federico IP University, School of Medicine, Naples, Italy
          183797 Horm Res 1993;40:209–216
          © 1993 S. Karger AG, Basel

          Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Pages: 8
          Original Paper


          Comment on this article