Browsing by Author "Beleslin, B. (6701355427)"

Purpose: Whereas antithyroid drugs (ATD) are the preferred treatment modality for Graves’ hyperthyroidism (GH), there is still controversy about the optimal regimen for delivering ATD. To evaluate whether ‘Block and Replace’ (B + R) and ‘Titration’ (T) regimes are equivalent in terms of frequency of euthyroidism and Graves’ Orbitopathy (GO) during ATD therapy. Methods: A prospective multicentre observational cohort study of 344 patients with GH but no GO at baseline. Patients were treated with ATD for 18 months according to B + R or T regimen in line with their institution’s policy. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. In the treatment period between 6 and 18 months thyrotropin (TSH) slightly increased in both groups, but TSH was on average 0.59 mU/L (95% CI 0.27–0.85) lower in the B + R group at all time points (p = 0.026). Serum free thyroxine (FT4) remained stable during the same interval, with a tendency to higher values in the B + R group. The point-prevalence of euthyroidism (TSH and FT4 within their reference ranges) increased with longer duration of ATD in both groups; it was always higher in the T group than in the B + R group: 48 and 24%, respectively, at 6 months, 81 and 58% at 12 months, and 87 and 63% at 18 months (p < 0.002). There were no significant differences between the B + R and T regimens with respect to the fall in thyrotropin binding inhibiting immunoglobulins (TBII) or thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPO-Ab). GO developed in 15.9% of all patients: 9.1 and 17.8% in B + R group and T group, respectively, (p = 0.096). GO was mild in 13% and moderate-to-severe in 2%. Conclusion: The prevalence of biochemical euthyroidism during treatment with antithyroid drugs is higher during T compared to B + R regimen. De novo development of GO did not differ significantly between the two regimens, although it tended to be higher in the T group. Whether one regimen is clinically more advantageous than the other remains unclear. © 2020, Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE).

Purpose: Whereas antithyroid drugs (ATD) are the preferred treatment modality for Graves’ hyperthyroidism (GH), there is still controversy about the optimal regimen for delivering ATD. To evaluate whether ‘Block and Replace’ (B + R) and ‘Titration’ (T) regimes are equivalent in terms of frequency of euthyroidism and Graves’ Orbitopathy (GO) during ATD therapy. Methods: A prospective multicentre observational cohort study of 344 patients with GH but no GO at baseline. Patients were treated with ATD for 18 months according to B + R or T regimen in line with their institution’s policy. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. In the treatment period between 6 and 18 months thyrotropin (TSH) slightly increased in both groups, but TSH was on average 0.59 mU/L (95% CI 0.27–0.85) lower in the B + R group at all time points (p = 0.026). Serum free thyroxine (FT4) remained stable during the same interval, with a tendency to higher values in the B + R group. The point-prevalence of euthyroidism (TSH and FT4 within their reference ranges) increased with longer duration of ATD in both groups; it was always higher in the T group than in the B + R group: 48 and 24%, respectively, at 6 months, 81 and 58% at 12 months, and 87 and 63% at 18 months (p < 0.002). There were no significant differences between the B + R and T regimens with respect to the fall in thyrotropin binding inhibiting immunoglobulins (TBII) or thyroid peroxidase antibodies (TPO-Ab). GO developed in 15.9% of all patients: 9.1 and 17.8% in B + R group and T group, respectively, (p = 0.096). GO was mild in 13% and moderate-to-severe in 2%. Conclusion: The prevalence of biochemical euthyroidism during treatment with antithyroid drugs is higher during T compared to B + R regimen. De novo development of GO did not differ significantly between the two regimens, although it tended to be higher in the T group. Whether one regimen is clinically more advantageous than the other remains unclear. © 2020, Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE).

The aim of the study was to evaluate thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) concentration in a reference group and to compare it with the TSH in subjects with high probability of thyroid dysfunction. The study population consisted of 852 subjects. The reference group consisting of 316 subjects was obtained by the exclusion of the subjects having thyroid disease, taking thyroid influencing drugs, having increased thyroid peroxidase (TPO) antibodies, or having abnormal thyroid ultrasound. 42 high probability of thyroid dysfunction subjects were defined by the association of increased TPO antibody concentration, changed echogenicity, and changed echosonographic structure of thyroid parenchyma. In the reference group TSH reference range was 0.45mU/l (95% CI 0.390.56mU/l) to 3.43mU/l (95% CI 3.104.22mU/l). To distinguish reference and high probability of thyroid dysfunction group a TSH threshold was calculated. At a threshold value of 3.09mU/l (95% CI 2.933.38mU/l), specificity was 95% and sensitivity 38.1%. Using 2 different approaches to find upper limit of the TSH reference range we obtained similar results. Using reference group only a value of 3.43mU/l was obtained. Using both reference group and subjects with the high probability of thyroid dysfunction we obtained 95% CI for the upper reference limit between 2.93 and 3.38mU/l. Based on these premises, it could be argued that conservative estimate of the TSH upper reference range should be 3.4mU/l for both sexes. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG.

The aim of the study was to evaluate thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) concentration in a reference group and to compare it with the TSH in subjects with high probability of thyroid dysfunction. The study population consisted of 852 subjects. The reference group consisting of 316 subjects was obtained by the exclusion of the subjects having thyroid disease, taking thyroid influencing drugs, having increased thyroid peroxidase (TPO) antibodies, or having abnormal thyroid ultrasound. 42 high probability of thyroid dysfunction subjects were defined by the association of increased TPO antibody concentration, changed echogenicity, and changed echosonographic structure of thyroid parenchyma. In the reference group TSH reference range was 0.45mU/l (95% CI 0.390.56mU/l) to 3.43mU/l (95% CI 3.104.22mU/l). To distinguish reference and high probability of thyroid dysfunction group a TSH threshold was calculated. At a threshold value of 3.09mU/l (95% CI 2.933.38mU/l), specificity was 95% and sensitivity 38.1%. Using 2 different approaches to find upper limit of the TSH reference range we obtained similar results. Using reference group only a value of 3.43mU/l was obtained. Using both reference group and subjects with the high probability of thyroid dysfunction we obtained 95% CI for the upper reference limit between 2.93 and 3.38mU/l. Based on these premises, it could be argued that conservative estimate of the TSH upper reference range should be 3.4mU/l for both sexes. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of repurposing health care facilities in response to COVID-19 on the access of patients with thyroid disease to health care. Methods: This study consisted of a web-based survey. The survey was anonymous and consisted of forty questions. Results: This survey included 206 respondents. 91.3% of the respondents had health insurance through the Republic Fund of Health Insurance, 9.7% had private or both health insurances, and 3.4% did not have any health insurance. A significant proportion of respondents (60.4%) had to switch from public to private health care to reach a physician and 73.8% had to switch from public to private laboratories. For the 91.9%, this was perceived as a financial burden. Before the pandemic, 83.1% of respondents reported regular follow-up by physicians, which decreased to 44.9% during the pandemic (p < 0.01). 76.3% of the respondents regarded that their thyroid disease was managed optimally before the pandemic, while this figure declined to only 48% during the pandemic (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the medical care of thyroid patients in Serbia. For the patients treated in the public health care system, access to general practice was hindered, while access to specialist care was disrupted. It led to a switch from public to private health care, which was perceived as a financial burden for almost all the respondents. However, private health care proved to be an important safety net when the public system was overwhelmed. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE).

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of repurposing health care facilities in response to COVID-19 on the access of patients with thyroid disease to health care. Methods: This study consisted of a web-based survey. The survey was anonymous and consisted of forty questions. Results: This survey included 206 respondents. 91.3% of the respondents had health insurance through the Republic Fund of Health Insurance, 9.7% had private or both health insurances, and 3.4% did not have any health insurance. A significant proportion of respondents (60.4%) had to switch from public to private health care to reach a physician and 73.8% had to switch from public to private laboratories. For the 91.9%, this was perceived as a financial burden. Before the pandemic, 83.1% of respondents reported regular follow-up by physicians, which decreased to 44.9% during the pandemic (p < 0.01). 76.3% of the respondents regarded that their thyroid disease was managed optimally before the pandemic, while this figure declined to only 48% during the pandemic (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the medical care of thyroid patients in Serbia. For the patients treated in the public health care system, access to general practice was hindered, while access to specialist care was disrupted. It led to a switch from public to private health care, which was perceived as a financial burden for almost all the respondents. However, private health care proved to be an important safety net when the public system was overwhelmed. © 2022, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE).