Search

Context Adrenal incidentalomas (AIs) are increasingly being identified during unrelated imaging. Unlike AI clinical management, data on referral patterns in routine practice are lacking. Objective This work aimed to identify factors associated with AI referral. Methods We linked data from imaging reports and outpatient bookings from a large UK teaching hospital. We examined (i) AI prevalence and (ii) pattern of referral to endocrinology, stratified by age, imaging modality, scan anatomical site, requesting clinical specialty, and temporal trends. Using key radiology phrases to identify scans reporting potential AI, we identified 4097 individuals from 479 945 scan reports (2015-2019). Main outcome measures included prevalence of AI and referral rates. Results Overall, AI lesions were identified in 1.2% of scans. They were more prevalent in abdomen computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging scans (3.0% and 0.6%, respectively). Scans performed increased 7.7% year-on-year from 2015 to 2019, with a more pronounced increase in the number with AI lesions (14.7% per year). Only 394 of 4097 patients (9.6%) had a documented endocrinology referral code within 90 days, with medical (11.8%) more likely to refer than surgical (7.2%) specialties (P Conclusion While overall AI prevalence appeared low, scan numbers are large and rising; the number with identified AI are increasing still further. The poor AI referral rates, even in centers such as ours where dedicated AI multidisciplinary team meetings and digital management systems are used, highlights the need for new streamlined, clinically effective systems and processes to appropriately manage the AI workload.

Whilst the estimated prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma is 0.5-2% following abdominal CT scan (1), little is known about subsequent endocrine referral patterns according to clinical specialty. We therefore examined the range of specialties that were responsible for requesting CT and MRI scans that led to reporting potential adrenal lesions. We also explored the referral pattern to endocrinology following identification. We extracted data from all radiology reports for all CT and MRI scans from Jan 2018-Oct 2019. We utilised a key phrase search strategy (eg adrenal adenoma/lesion/mass/nodule/incidentaloma, incidental adrenal, indeterminate adrenal). Where possible we excluded false hits (eg no adrenal lesion). These were lined to the referral patterns as identified by a referral logged or an attendance (new or follow-up) to endocrine clinic 3 months post index scan. These data were stratified by requesting specialty. Preliminary data showed that, out of 127878 scans, 2021 patients were identified to have a potential adrenal incidentaloma. These requests came from a total of 45 different clinical specialities (medical and surgical). The top 12 specialties accounted from 82.8% of these referrals. Medical specialties (renal, gastroenterology, respiratory, general medicine, acute medicine and geriatric medicine) accounted for 50.2%. The remaining 32.6% were via surgical specialities. The overall referral pattern in these cases was 8.5% with no difference between medical (8.6%) and surgical (8.4%) specialties. In conclusion, adrenal incidentalomas are potentially identifiable across a wide range of specialties. Currently, despite a dedicated adrenal multidisciplinary team and nationally-acknowledged quality improvement programme for the management of adrenal incidentalomas (2), the majority of cases are overlooked and not referred for endocrine review as suggested in current guidelines. We expect the findings in our centre to be reproducible elsewhere. We are considering innovative approaches to improve the process and cope with the additional workload cost-effectively. 1. Barzon L, Sonino N, Fallo F, Palu G, Boscaro M. Prevalence and natural history of adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2003;149:273-285. Hanna FWF, Issa BG, Lea SC, George C, Golash A, Firn M, Ogunmekan S, Maddock E, Sim J, Xydopoulos G, Fordham R, Fryer AA. Adrenal lesions found incidentally: how to improve clinical and cost-effectiveness. BMJ Open Quality. 2019;In press.

It is estimated that the prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma increases with age: ~3% of those aged 50 years, rising to 10% in those >70 years (1). Given the aging population together with increased utilisation of cross-sectional imaging in the UK (eg CT urogram, MR angiogram), we explored the proportion of patients with adrenal incidentaloma by age based on current imaging trends. Furthermore, there is no information currently available on the relationship between age and pattern of endocrine referrals. We extracted data for all CT and MRI scans from Jan 2018-Oct 2019 and used key phrases in radiology reports (eg adrenal adenoma/lesion/mass/nodule/incidentaloma, incidental adrenal, indeterminate adrenal) to identify potential lesions. We also extracted data on patient age and referral patterns as identified by a logged referral or an attendance (new or follow-up) to endocrine clinic 3 months post index scan, stratified by 10 year age groups. Where possible, we excluded false hits (eg no adrenal lesion). Preliminary data showed that, of the 2604 potential lesions identified by CT and MRI scans, 78.7% were on patients aged over 60 years. The numbers of identified lesions gradually increased with age to a peak in the 71-80 year age group after which these declined. Whilst patients younger that 60 years had fewer potential lesions identified, they were more likely to be referred to endocrine services (73 out of 55 patients; 13.2%) than those in the older age group (168 out of 2049; 8.2%; p

The estimated prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma at abdominal CT scan is 0.5-2% (1). However, from clinical practice, we noticed that incidentalomas are referred from other imaging modalities (eg MRI) and of other sites (eg thorax, spine). We therefore explored the relationship between prevalence rates and (i) imaging modality and (ii) its change over time, in a real world clinical setting from a large UK teaching hospital/trauma centre. We also examined the referral pattern of potential lesions to endocrinology. We extracted data from all radiology reports for all CT and MRI scans from Jan 2018-Oct 2019. We utilised a key phrase search strategy (eg adrenal adenoma/lesion/mass/nodule/incidentaloma, incidental adrenal, indeterminate adrenal). Where possible we excluded false hits (eg no adrenal lesion). These were linked to the referral patterns as identified by a referral logged or an attendance (new or follow-up) to endocrine clinic 3 months post index scan. Preliminary data showed that, from a total of 127878 scans performed, 2604 potential lesions were reported (prevalence 2.0%), comprising 2496/88838 (2.8%) CT scans and 108/39040 (0.3%) MRI scans. The number of scans/month increased in 2019 vs 2018 (6.9% for CT and 12.6% for MRI). Only 9.0% and 15.7% of reported potential lesions detected by CT and MRI, respectively, were referred for endocrine review. Hence, MRI patients were more likely to be referred than those with CT scans (p=0.018). Referral rates were lower in 2019 than 2018 (8.6% vs 14.4%; p less than 0.001). This approach has its limitations but allows efficiently review of large cohorts. Adrenal incidentalomas pose a rising challenge in view of increasing reliance on scanning. Despite a dedicated adrenal multidisciplinary team with a national track record in improving management of incidentalomas (2), the referral rate of potential lesions is worryingly low and not improving, with >90% of cases overlooked. This work is part of on-going innovation to enhance the pick-up rate for these cases whilst addressing the increased endocrine workload in a cost-effective manner. 1. Barzon L, Sonino N, Fallo F, Palu G, Boscaro M. Prevalence and natural history of adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2003;149:273-285. 2. Hanna FWF, Issa BG, Lea SC, George C, Golash A, Firn M, Ogunmekan S, Maddock E, Sim J, Xydopoulos G, Fordham R, Fryer AA. Adrenal lesions found incidentally: how to improve clinical and cost-effectiveness. BMJ Open Quality. 2019;In press.

Correlation between midnight and post dexamethasone salivary cortisone and cortisol and post dexamethasone serum cortisol concentrations in patients with unilateral and bilateral adrenal incidentalomas Background: The commonest functional abnormality in adrenal incidentalomas (AI) is autonomous cortisol secretion. Most guidelines recommend a 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ONDST) as a screening test for this abnormality. This requires either a short stay or attendance to hospital as well as the inconvenience of venepuncture. Aim: To investigate the utility of using salivary samples in an ONDST by correlating post dexamethasone salivary cortisol (SaC) and cortisone (SaCn) and midnight salivary cortisol (MSaC) and cortisone (MSaCn) concentrations with post dexamethasone cortisol (SC). Methods: Using linear regression analysis we correlated post SC with SaC and SaCn and with MSaC and MSaCn. Results: We examined the results of 57 patients with unilateral or bilateral adrenal incidentalomas who underwent a 1 mg dexamethasone suppression test on our unit. The SC range

Background: Adrenal incidentalomas (AI) are incidentally identified lesions whilst scanning for other purposes. They are mostly benign and hormonally inactive but about 20% are hormonally-active or malignant, requiring prompt intervention. The overall reported AI prevalence is 3-5% but increases with age (up to 7% of those above 70 years). Guidelines stipulate that patients with AI should be investigated, but only a small proportion of patients are referred for an endocrine work up.. We are not aware of any work that systematically looked at the proportion of missed cases of AI. Aim: To identify the proportion of missed cases with AI.Methods: Data on adrenal lesions reported on CT scans were collected, utilising pre-agreed key phrases to identify AI. These included the terms: Adrenal adenoma, Adrenal incidentaloma, Adrenal lesion, Adrenal mass, Adrenal nodule, Incidental adrenal, Indeterminate adrenal. These data were collected from 2014-2016, focusing on the referral for the month of November each year as a representative sample. Patients with known cancer were excluded and those with genuine AIs were then checked (based on MDT note entry and/or review of endocrinology letters) to confirm whether they were appropriately identified and then referred to endocrinology for further assessment or not.Results: November 2014: Out of a total 57 cases, identified using the key phrases, 30 had previously known malignancies and hence were excluded. This left a net of 27 genuine AI cases. Out of those, only 8 (29.6%) were referred for further assessment. November 2015: Out of a total 76 cases, 35 had genuine AIs (with 41 cases of known malignancy). Only 10 AIs were referred on (28.6%) November 2016: Out of a total 77 cases, 62 had genuine AIs (with 15 cases of known malignancy). Only 20 AIs were referred on (32.3%) The missed cases are equivalent to approximately one third of the endocrinology workload for our unit. Conclusion: Despite an established and dedicated MDT, only a third of cases are referred for further evaluation, with 70% are being overlooked. The potential for missing functional or malignant cases is a serious patient safety risk. Paradoxically, the financial implication for managing this work load is - to our knowledge - significant and has never been considered in a systematic way.

Background: Adrenal incidentalomas (AI) are incidentally identified lesions whilst scanning for other purposes. They are mostly benign and hormonally inactive but about 20% are hormonally-active or malignant, requiring prompt intervention. The overall reported AI prevalence is 3-5% but increases with age (up to 7% of those above 70 years). The arranged investigations (hormonal work-up and further scanning) pose significant financial pressure on providers. Methods: We developed a cost-effectiveness tool “the Adrenal Incidentaloma Intervention Cost Assessment Tool (AI2CAT)”.We developed a novel web-based, electronic Adrenal Incidentaloma Management System (eAIMS).We conducted time & motion study utilising the estimated time managing an individual AI case. This was undertaken for different phases of our work: (i) pre-intervention, (ii) The implementation of case prioritisation strategy + utilisation of eAIMS and (iii) future proactive case identification and streamlining into low- and high-risk groups. Results: Projecting our unit’s case load to a UK-wide context, there could be 50,000 new cases PA/year.Utilising the AI2CAT tool and the time and motion analysis data, demonstrated that introducing the eAIMS system in combination with the MDT prioritisation process (Phase 2) reduced the number of tasks required in the AI management pathway. This resulted in a reduction in the hands-on total time taken (from AI identification to MDT decision) by 48.6%.Utilising standardised staff costs, hands-on time was reduced by 28.2% of total costs/patient. Conclusion: We have developed an electronic management system for AI, together with a cost-effectiveness tool to measure the potential cost implications. The combined approach of using the eAIMS system together with a prioritisation strategy resulted in reduced staff hands-on time and cost per case.

Background: The most common functional abnormality in adrenal incidentalomas (AI) is autonomous cortisol secretion. Most guidelines recommend a 1 mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (ONDST) as a screening test for this abnormality. There is some evidence that simultaneous measurement of post dexamethasone serum dexamethasone (SD) with serum cortisol (SC) improves the accuracy of the ONDST. We have therefore been routinely measuring SD in our unit to ensure adequate concentrations when interpreting the results of this test. Aim: To measure the correlation between SD and SC concentrations and SD with the decrement in serum cortisol levels from baseline (9 am the day before the test) to the post dexamethasone level (DSC) in the ONDST. Method: We examined the results of 57 patients with unilateral or bilateral adrenal incidentalomas who underwent a 1 mg ONDST on our unit. Using linear regression analysis, we correlated SC and SD concentrations and serum SD concentration with the DSC. We also examined whether lower levels of SD were associated with adequate suppression of SC following ONDST. Results: SD levels range 16, median 7.656 nmol/L. SC range