{"title":"Optimizing adrenal vein sampling interpretation for primary aldosteronism subtyping.","authors":"Yuan Xiong, Shengjun Luo, Shili Peng, Ying Jing, Hang Shen, Xizi Zhang, Qinglian Zeng, Ying Song, Qianna Zhen, Yifan He, Wenwen He, Qi Zhang, Jinbo Hu, Linqiang Ma, Qifu Li, Shumin Yang","doi":"10.1007/s12020-026-04806-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Guidelines recommend adrenal vein sampling (AVS) for subtyping primary aldosteronism (PA); however, the optimal sample for determining lateralization when multiple successful adrenal vein samples are obtained is unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the impact of different adrenal vein sample-selection strategies on PA subtyping.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was conducted in PA patients who underwent bilaterally successful AVS with multiple samples obtained from each adrenal vein. LI was calculated using four different sample-selection strategies: (1) Maximum Aldosterone (Max Aldo), the sample with the highest aldosterone concentration; (2) Maximum Cortisol (Max Cort), the sample with the highest cortisol concentration; (3) Maximum ACR (Max ACR), the sample with the highest aldosterone-to-cortisol ratio (ACR) across samples; (4) Mean ACR, the average ACR of all samples. The theoretical detection rate of unilateral PA (UPA) and diagnostic accuracy for PA subtyping were compared among the four strategies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 585 patients with PA were included. In the 460 PA patients who underwent non-adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-stimulated AVS, the theoretical detection rate of UPA varied significantly among the four sample-selection strategies (P < 0.001), and was highest with Max Aldo (62.0%, 285/460), followed by Max ACR (59.1%, 272/460), Max Cort (57.8%, 266/460) and Mean ACR (56.3%, 259/460). Among 206 patients with postoperative diagnoses, the accuracy also differed significantly among the four strategies (P < 0.001), and Max Aldo ranked first (85.9%, 95% CI: 80.6%-90.1%), followed by Max ACR (84.0%, 95% CI: 78.4%-88.5%), Mean ACR (82.0%, 95% CI: 76.3%-86.8%), and Max Cort (78.2%, 95% CI: 72.0%-83.4%). Max Aldo was more accurate than Max Cort (adjusted P < 0.001), whereas no significant differences were observed between Max Aldo and Max ACR or Mean ACR (all adjusted P > 0.05). In the 308 patients who underwent ACTH-stimulated AVS, Max Aldo yielded the highest numerical detection rate and diagnostic accuracy; however, no significant differences were observed among the four strategies (P = 0.078 for theoretical UPA detection and P = 0.098 for diagnostic accuracy).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For AVS with multiple samples, calculation of the LI based on the sample with the highest aldosterone concentration on each side tended to yield the highest numerical theoretical detection rate of UPA and accuracy, particularly in non-ACTH-stimulated AVS protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":49211,"journal":{"name":"Endocrine","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endocrine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-026-04806-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Context: Guidelines recommend adrenal vein sampling (AVS) for subtyping primary aldosteronism (PA); however, the optimal sample for determining lateralization when multiple successful adrenal vein samples are obtained is unclear.
Objective: To compare the impact of different adrenal vein sample-selection strategies on PA subtyping.
Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in PA patients who underwent bilaterally successful AVS with multiple samples obtained from each adrenal vein. LI was calculated using four different sample-selection strategies: (1) Maximum Aldosterone (Max Aldo), the sample with the highest aldosterone concentration; (2) Maximum Cortisol (Max Cort), the sample with the highest cortisol concentration; (3) Maximum ACR (Max ACR), the sample with the highest aldosterone-to-cortisol ratio (ACR) across samples; (4) Mean ACR, the average ACR of all samples. The theoretical detection rate of unilateral PA (UPA) and diagnostic accuracy for PA subtyping were compared among the four strategies.
Results: A total of 585 patients with PA were included. In the 460 PA patients who underwent non-adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-stimulated AVS, the theoretical detection rate of UPA varied significantly among the four sample-selection strategies (P < 0.001), and was highest with Max Aldo (62.0%, 285/460), followed by Max ACR (59.1%, 272/460), Max Cort (57.8%, 266/460) and Mean ACR (56.3%, 259/460). Among 206 patients with postoperative diagnoses, the accuracy also differed significantly among the four strategies (P < 0.001), and Max Aldo ranked first (85.9%, 95% CI: 80.6%-90.1%), followed by Max ACR (84.0%, 95% CI: 78.4%-88.5%), Mean ACR (82.0%, 95% CI: 76.3%-86.8%), and Max Cort (78.2%, 95% CI: 72.0%-83.4%). Max Aldo was more accurate than Max Cort (adjusted P < 0.001), whereas no significant differences were observed between Max Aldo and Max ACR or Mean ACR (all adjusted P > 0.05). In the 308 patients who underwent ACTH-stimulated AVS, Max Aldo yielded the highest numerical detection rate and diagnostic accuracy; however, no significant differences were observed among the four strategies (P = 0.078 for theoretical UPA detection and P = 0.098 for diagnostic accuracy).
Conclusion: For AVS with multiple samples, calculation of the LI based on the sample with the highest aldosterone concentration on each side tended to yield the highest numerical theoretical detection rate of UPA and accuracy, particularly in non-ACTH-stimulated AVS protocols.
期刊介绍:
Well-established as a major journal in today’s rapidly advancing experimental and clinical research areas, Endocrine publishes original articles devoted to basic (including molecular, cellular and physiological studies), translational and clinical research in all the different fields of endocrinology and metabolism. Articles will be accepted based on peer-reviews, priority, and editorial decision. Invited reviews, mini-reviews and viewpoints on relevant pathophysiological and clinical topics, as well as Editorials on articles appearing in the Journal, are published. Unsolicited Editorials will be evaluated by the editorial team. Outcomes of scientific meetings, as well as guidelines and position statements, may be submitted. The Journal also considers special feature articles in the field of endocrine genetics and epigenetics, as well as articles devoted to novel methods and techniques in endocrinology.
Endocrine covers controversial, clinical endocrine issues. Meta-analyses on endocrine and metabolic topics are also accepted. Descriptions of single clinical cases and/or small patients studies are not published unless of exceptional interest. However, reports of novel imaging studies and endocrine side effects in single patients may be considered. Research letters and letters to the editor related or unrelated to recently published articles can be submitted.
Endocrine covers leading topics in endocrinology such as neuroendocrinology, pituitary and hypothalamic peptides, thyroid physiological and clinical aspects, bone and mineral metabolism and osteoporosis, obesity, lipid and energy metabolism and food intake control, insulin, Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, hormones of male and female reproduction, adrenal diseases pediatric and geriatric endocrinology, endocrine hypertension and endocrine oncology.