Stan, Marius N.

Background: Thyrotoxicosis has multiple etiologies, manifestations, and potential therapies. Appropriate treatment requires an accurate diagnosis and is influenced by coexisting medical conditions and patient preference. This document describes evidence-based clinical guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that would be useful to generalist and subspecialty physicians and others providing care for patients with this condition. Methods: The American Thyroid Association (ATA) previously cosponsored guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that were published in 2011. Considerable new literature has been published since then, and the ATA felt updated evidence-based guidelines were needed. The association assembled a task force of expert clinicians who authored this report. They examined relevant literature using a systematic PubMed search supplemented with additional published materials. An evidence-based medicine approach that incorporated the knowledge and experience of the panel was used to update the 2011 text and recommendations. The strength of the recommendations and the quality of evidence supporting them were rated according to the approach recommended by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Group. Results: Clinical topics addressed include the initial evaluation and management of thyrotoxicosis; management of Graves' hyperthyroidism using radioactive iodine, antithyroid drugs, or surgery; management of toxic multinodular goiter or toxic adenoma using radioactive iodine or surgery; Graves' disease in children, adolescents, or pregnant patients; subclinical hyperthyroidism; hyperthyroidism in patients with Graves' orbitopathy; and management of other miscellaneous causes of thyrotoxicosis. New paradigms since publication of the 2011 guidelines are presented for the evaluation of the etiology of thyrotoxicosis, the management of Graves' hyperthyroidism with antithyroid drugs, the management of pregnant hyperthyroid patients, and the preparation of patients for thyroid surgery. The sections on less common causes of thyrotoxicosis have been expanded. Conclusions: One hundred twenty-four evidence-based recommendations were developed to aid in the care of patients with thyrotoxicosis and to share what the task force believes is current, rational, and optimal medical practice.

Background: Thyroid lymphoma is a relatively rare disease often posing a diagnostic challenge. Reaching the final diagnosis can be delayed if insufficient biopsy material is obtained for immunohistochemistry analysis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical, biochemical, and radiological features of thyroid lymphoma. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of all Mayo Clinic patients evaluated between 2000 and 2014 who had a tissue biopsy positive for thyroid lymphoma. Results: Seventy-five subjects had biopsy-proven thyroid lymphoma, and 62.7% were primary thyroid lymphomas. The median age at diagnosis was 67 years (range 20–90 years). A total of 50.7% were male, and 54.7% had a history of Hashimoto's thyroiditis. Presenting symptoms included neck mass (88%), dysphagia (45.3%), and hoarseness (37.3%). The typical ultrasound appearance consisted of a solid, hypoechoic mass with increased vascularity and variable edge characteristics. Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsies were abnormal in 70.7% of cases, and 42% indicated a specific lymphoma subtype. The diagnosis was confirmed in 53.3% by core biopsy, in 21.3% by thyroidectomy (partial or total), in 12% through incisional biopsy, and in 12% by lymph node biopsy. Core biopsy had a higher sensitivity compared with FNA (93% vs. 71%, p = 0.006). Conclusion: A rapidly enlarging neck mass in the setting of Hashimoto's thyroiditis should raise suspicion for thyroid lymphoma. Radiologically, this usually presents as a large, unilateral, thyroid-centered mass, hypoechoic by ultrasound, and expanding into adjacent soft tissues. Core-needle biopsy should be the first diagnostic test to expedite reaching the final diagnosis and decrease patient burden of additional tests and interventions.

Background: Subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) has been associated with increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in some, but not all, studies. Uncertainty remains regarding the impact of levothyroxine (LT4) therapy on improving health outcomes in pregnant women with SCH. The objective of this study was to assess the potential benefits of LT4 therapy in pregnant women with SCH. Methods: The medical records were reviewed of pregnant women with SCH, defined as an elevated serum thyrotropin (TSH) of >2.5 mIU/L for the 1st trimester or >3 mIU/L for the 2nd and 3rd trimesters, but ≤10 mIU/L. Pregnant women were divided into two groups depending on whether they received LT4 (group A) or not (group B). Pregnancy loss and other pre-specified adverse outcomes were evaluated during follow-up. Results: There were 82 women in group A and 284 in group B. Group A had a higher body mass index ( p = 0.04) and a higher serum TSH level ( p < 0.0001) compared with group B. Group A had fewer pregnancies lost ( n = 5 [6.1%] vs. n = 25 [8.8%]; p = 0.12), low birth weight (LBW) offspring (1.3% vs. 10%; p < 0.001), and no neonates with a five-minute Apgar score ≤7 (0% vs. 7%; p < 0.001) compared with group B. Other pregnancy-related adverse outcomes were similar between the two groups. Inferences remained unchanged after considering different models to adjust for potential predictors of outcome. Conclusions: LT4 therapy is associated with a decreased risk of LBW and a low Apgar score among women with SCH. This association awaits confirmation in randomized trials before the widespread use of LT4 therapy in pregnant women with SCH.

Background: The best treatment option for patients with Graves' disease (GD) depends on each person's situation and how the differences between the treatment options matter to them in bringing resolution to their illness. The objective of this study was to develop and test an encounter decision tool (GD Choice) for patients and clinicians to engage in shared decision making about the treatment of GD. Methods: GD Choice was developed using an iterative process based on the principles of interaction design and participatory action research. To evaluate the impact of the tool, a controlled before–after study was conducted, assessing the use of GD Choice versus usual care (UC). Results: Sixty-eight patients were enrolled, 37 to UC and 31 to GD Choice. At baseline, the groups were similar. Treatment discussion length was similar in both arms. After their visit, patients in both groups had similar knowledge about the options, except for GD Choice patients knowing significantly more about the complications of treatment (correctly answered by 83% vs. 55%; p = 0.04). Compared with UC, patients in the GD Choice arm had greater involvement in decision making observed on video recordings of clinical encounters (mean OPTION scale score, 35% vs. 30%; p = 0.02), but reported similar levels of decisional comfort and participation in shared decision making. Conclusions: GD Choice increases engagement in the decision-making process and knowledge regarding intervention complications without increasing the length of consultation. These promising results support the conduct of a randomized trial of GD Choice versus UC in a large multicenter trial.