Surgery for adrenal angiomyelolipoma: an individualized concept.

BACKGROUND: Because adrenal angiomyelolipoma (AAML) is rare and uniformly benign, the indications for surgery are ill defined. METHODS: Among a series of 156 patients with adrenal pathologies surgically treated between 2013 and 2018, 12 patients were operated with the diagnosis of an AAML. The clinical as well as imaging parameters forming the individual indications for surgery were analyzed. RESULTS: Preoperative diagnosis consistent with AAML was made in all 12 patients. The mean size of surgically removed AAML was 82.3 mm (45-150 mm). Gender and affected side were evenly distributed. Local symptoms but lack of radiological signs suspicious for malignancy or size increase were observed in 4 of 12 patients (group 1, 33%). In contrast, 4 of 12 patients (group 2, 33%) showed radiological signs suspicious for malignancy but lacked local symptoms. Additional 4 of 12 patients (group 3, 33%) showed both local symptoms and radiological signs suspicious for malignancy. Patients with local symptoms harbored significantly larger tumors compared to those patients that lacked local symptoms (93.9 mm ± 32.8 vs. 59.3 mm ± 2.7, p = 0.021). Patients with radiologically suspicious signs were older (60 years ± 9.9 vs. 53 years ± 5.4, p > 0.05), and time to surgery was shorter (4.4 months ± 3 vs. 6.0 months ± 3.0, p > 0.05). Importantly, surgical approach was not influenced by tumor size (p = 0.65). However, patients with suspicious imaging were more likely to be operated by conventional open approach (4 of 8 vs. 0 of 4, p = 0.08). The minimal invasive approach was associated with shorter hospital stay (7 days, ± 1.3 vs. 14.2 days, ± 8.8, p = 0.038). All lesions that showed radiological signs suspicious for malignancy proved benign in final histology. CONCLUSION: Large AAML present a clinical challenge. The presence of local symptoms and/or radiological signs suspicious for malignancy identifies three groups of patients that define the concept of an individualized indication for surgery in AAML. A minimal invasive approach can be advocated even for large AAML with radiological signs suspicious for malignancy.

Prevalence and predictors of vitamin D-deficiency in frail older hospitalized patients.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency is known to be highly prevalent in older persons. However, the prevalence in the subgroup of frail older hospitalized patients is not clear. We sought to investigate the prevalence and predictors of vitamin D deficiency in frail older hospitalized patients. METHODS: 217 consecutively geriatric hospitalized patients with routine measurements of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25 (OH)D] at hospital admission were analyzed retrospectively, including information of previous vitamin D supplementation and the geriatric assessment. Serum 25 (OH)D concentrations < 20 ng/ml and between 20 and 29.99 ng/ml were classified as deficient and insufficient, respectively, whereas concentrations ≥30 ng/ml were considered as desirable. A stepwise binary logistic regression model was performed to assess the simultaneous effects of age, gender and geriatric assessments on the prevalence of low vitamin D concentration. RESULTS: Mean age of the cohort was 81.6 ± 8.0 years (70.0% females). Mean serum 25(OH)D was 12.7 ± 12.9 ng/ml. Of 167 (77%) subjects without known previous vitamin D supplementation, only 21 (12.6%) had serum concentrations ≥20 ng/ml and only 8 (4.2%) had desirable serum concentrations ≥30 ng/ml. In total population, 146 (87.4%) participants were vitamin D deficient. Despite vitamin D supplementation, 22 of 50 participants (44.0%) were vitamin D deficient and only 19 (38.0%) had desirable concentrations of ≥30 ng/ml. In a stepwise logistic regression analysis, only previous intake of vitamin D supplementation and high Geriatric Depression Scale score (GDS-15) were significantly associated with vitamin D deficiency. CONCLUSIONS: In the group of frail older hospitalized patients without previous vitamin D supplementation, the prevalence of inadequate vitamin D concentrations is extremely high. Therefore, usefulness of the routine measurement of vitamin D status before initiating of supplementation appears to be questionable in this patient group.