Article Text

Download PDFPDF
CASE REPORT
Gangliocytoma: outcome of a rare silent pituitary tumour
  1. Bruno Donadille1,
  2. Chiara Villa2,
  3. Stephan Gaillard3,
  4. Sophie Christin-Maitre1
  1. 1Department of Endocrinology, Assistance Publique—Hopital Saint Antoine, Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France
  2. 2Department of Pathological Cytology and Anatomy, Hopital Foch, Suresnes, Île-de-France, France
  3. 3Neurosurgery Department, Hopital Foch, Suresnes, Île-de-France, France
  1. Correspondence to Dr Bruno Donadille, bruno.donadille{at}aphp.fr

Summary

The most common finding in front of a pituitary incidentaloma is a silent pituitary adenoma. We describe a 59 years old woman with a pituitary gangliocytoma and her follow-up after 1 year. Hormonal exploration only evidenced partial corticotropic insufficiency. A trans-sphenoidal surgery was performed due to the tumour's suprasellar expansion. Gangliocytoma is a benign tumour of unknown prevalence, belonging to central nervous system tumour with neuronal differentiation, and 129 cases have been reported in the literature. growth hormone (GH), adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) or prolactin secretions have been reported, as these ganglion cell-like mature neurons are usually mixed with secreting pituitary endocrine cells. We report a case with a pure gangliocytoma devoid of symptomatic endocrine secretion, not surrounded by pituitary endocrine tumour cells. Immunochemistry of the tumour was positive for hypothalamic growth hormone releasing hormone (GHRH) and pituitary hormones, such as GH and ACTH. Hence, this immunoexpression was not associated with peripheral hormonal secretions, suggesting biologically inactive hypothalamopituitary hormones.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors BD is the clinician who took care of the patient, who wrote and submitted the article. CV is the pathologist who took care of the patient, who provided the tumour's microscopy and reviewed the article. SG reviewed the article. SC-M wrote and throughout reviewed the article.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.