| Title |
Pituitary apoplexy: an update on clinical and imaging features
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Insights into Imaging, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13244-014-0362-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessandro Boellis, Alberto di Napoli, Andrea Romano, Alessandro Bozzao |
| Abstract |
Pituitary apoplexy (PA) is a rare and potentially fatal clinical condition presenting acute headache, vomiting, visual impairment, ophthalmoplegia, altered mental state and possible panhypopituitarism. It mostly occurs in patients with haemorrhagic infarction of the pituitary gland due to a pre-existing macroadenoma. Although there are pathological and physiological conditions that may share similar imaging characteristics, both clinical and imaging features can guide the radiologist towards the correct diagnosis, especially using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In this review, we will describe the main clinical and epidemiological features of PA, illustrating CT and MRI findings and discussing the role of imaging in the differential diagnosis, prognosis and follow-up. Teaching points • Headache, ophtalmoplegia and visual impairment are frequent symptoms of pituitary apoplexy. • CT is often the first imaging tool in PA, showing areas of hyperdensity within the sellar region. • MRI could confirm haemorrhage within the pituitary gland and compression on the optic chiasm. • Frequent simulating conditions are aneurysms, Rathke cleft cysts, craniopharingioma and mucocele. • The role of imaging is still debated and needs more studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 15% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 63% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 May 2018.
All research outputs
#7,804,836
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Insights into Imaging
#463
of 1,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,898
of 260,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Insights into Imaging
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,072 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.