RESUMEN
PURPOSE: In a patient with elevated thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH, >50 µIU/ml) with sellar mass, it is crucial to differentiate isolated pituitary hyperplasia (IPH) from primary hypothyroidism coexisting with nonfunctioning pituitary adenoma (PHCNFPA) pre-operatively to avoid unwarranted surgery in the former condition. Here, we describe patients having pituitary mass/enlargement with markedly elevated TSH (>50 µIU/ml) and attempt to find the differentiating features between IPH and PHCNFPA. METHODS: This is a retrospective study conducted at a tertiary care center. Case records of patients presenting between January 2020 and December 2022 with elevated TSH (>50 µIU/ml) for whom magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the sella was available were reviewed. Demographic details, symptomatology, clinical examination findings, thyroid function tests, data on pituitary hormonal excess and deficiencies, MRI findings, and details regarding levothyroxine supplementation were noted. Based on the final diagnosis, the patients were categorized into two groups: PHCNFPA and IPH. RESULTS: Five and 11 patients were diagnosed with PHCNFPA and IPH, respectively. The median (IQR) age at presentation of patients with PHCNFPA was significantly higher than that of IPH patients [37 (28-60.5) vs. 21 (10-21.5) years, p: 0.002]. A longer duration of hypothyroid symptoms was noted in the IPH group whereas visual field defects and corticotropin deficiency were more frequent and the pituitary lesion size was greater in PHCNFPA. Thyroid function tests were not different between the two groups. The pituitary enlargement in IPH was initially an increase in pituitary height that progressed to symmetrical nipple-, dome- or tent-shaped enlargement. Besides this characteristic enlargement pattern, isointense appearance on T1-weighted and T2-weighted images, homogeneous contrast enhancement, and prompt regression of pituitary lesion with levothyroxine replacement were characteristic of IPH whereas heterogeneous enhancement, cystic/hemorrhagic change, and ≥Knosp III invasion were characteristic of PHCNFPA. Peripheral rim enhancement and Knosp I-II parasellar extension were not uncommon in patients with IPH and did not distinguish it from PHCNFPA. CONCLUSIONS: The present study reports the radiological evolution of IPH and a unique series of PHCNFPA along with the distinguishing characteristics between them.