EJE
European Society of Endocrinology clinical practice guidelines on the management of adrenal incidentalomas, in collaboration with the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors
Martin Fassnacht,1,2,*D Stylianos Tsagarakis,3 Massimo Terzolo, 40D Antoine Tabarin, 50D Anju Sahdev,6 John Newell-Price,7,8 Iris Pelsma,90D Ljiljana Marina, 1º Kerstin Lorenz, 11[D Irina Bancos, 12[D Wiebke Arlt, 13,14[D and Olaf M. Dekkers9,15
1Department of Internal Medicine I, Division of Endocrinology and Diabetes, University Hospital, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany 2Comprehensive Cancer Center Mainfranken, University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
3Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Evangelismos Hospital, Athens, Greece
4Internal Medicine 1, Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy
5Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and nutrition, University and CHU of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
6Department of Imaging, St Bartholomew’s Hospital, Barts Health, London, EC1A 7BE, United Kingdom
7Department of Oncology and Metabolism, Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2RX, United Kingdom
8Department of Endocrinology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, S10 2JF, United Kingdom
9Departments of Clinical Epidemiology and Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
10Clinic for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolic Diseases, University Clinical Centre of Serbia, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgarde, Serbia
11Department of Visceral, Vascular and Endocrine Surgery, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany
12Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Diabetes, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States
13Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, United Kingdom
14Centre for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Birmingham Health Partners, Birmingham, B15 2TH, United Kingdom
15Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
*Corresponding author: Department of Endocrinology, University Hospital Würzburg, Oberdürrbacherstrasse 6, 97078 Würzburg, Germany. Email: fassnacht_m@ukw.de
Abstract
Adrenal incidentalomas are adrenal masses detected on imaging performed for reasons other than suspected adrenal disease. In most cases, adrenal incidentalomas are nonfunctioning adrenocortical adenomas but may also require therapeutic intervention including that for adrenocortical carcinoma, pheochromocytoma, hormone-producing adenoma, or metastases. Here, we provide a revision of the first international, interdisciplinary guidelines on incidentalomas. We followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system and updated systematic reviews on 4 predefined clinical questions crucial for the management of incidentalomas: (1) How to assess risk of malignancy ?; (2) How to define and manage mild autonomous cortisol secretion ?; (3) Who should have surgical treatment and how should it be performed ?; and (4) What follow-up is indicated if the adrenal incidentaloma is not surgically removed?
Selected Recommendations: (1) Each adrenal mass requires dedicated adrenal imaging. Recent advances now allow discrimination between risk categories: Homogeneous lesions with Hounsfield unit (HU) ≤ 10 on unenhanced CT are benign and do not require any additional imaging independent of size. All other patients should be discussed in a multidisciplinary expert meeting, but only lesions >4 cm that are inhomogeneous or have HU >20 have sufficiently high risk of malignancy that surgery will be the usual management of choice. (2) Every patient needs a thorough clinical and endocrine work-up to exclude hormone excess including the measurement of plasma or urinary metanephrines and a 1-mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test (applying a cutoff value of serum cortisol ≤50 nmol/L [≤1.8 ug/dL]). Recent studies have provided evidence that most patients without clinical signs of overt Cushing’s syndrome but serum cortisol levels post dexamethasone >50 nmol/L (>1.8 ug/dL) harbor increased risk of morbidity and mortality. For this condition, we propose the term “mild autonomous cortisol secretion” (MACS). (3) All patients with MACS should be screened for potential cortisol-related comorbidities that are potentially attributably to cortisol (eg, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus), to ensure these are appropriately treated. (4) In patients with MACS who also have relevant comorbidities surgical treatment should be considered in an individualized approach. (5) The appropriateness of surgical intervention should be guided by the likelihood of malignancy, the presence and degree of hormone excess, age, general health, and patient preference. We provide guidance on which surgical approach should be considered for adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy. (6) Surgery is not usually indicated in patients with an asymptomatic, nonfunctioning unilateral adrenal mass and obvious benign features on imaging studies. Furthermore, we offer recommendations for the follow-up of nonoperated patients, management of patients with bilateral incidentalomas, for patients with extra-adrenal malignancy and adrenal masses, and for young and elderly patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Finally, we suggest 10 important research questions for the future.
Keywords: adrenal tumors, diagnostic workup, therapy, follow-up
1. Summary of recommendations and highlighting the key changes in comparison to the guidelines 2016
The recommendations are worded as recommend (strong rec- ommendation) and suggest (weak recommendation). The quality of evidence behind the recommendations is classified as very low (+000), low (+000), moderate (+000), and strong (++++). Recommendations based only on good practice or clinical experience of the panelists were not graded. See further Section 3.4.
1.1. General remarks
· R.1.1. We recommend that patients with adrenal inciden- talomas are discussed in a multidisciplinary expert team meeting, if at least one of the following criteria is met:
- Imaging is not consistent with a benign lesion.
- There is evidence of hormone excess (including mild autonomous cortisol secretion [MACS] in pa- tients with clinically relevant comorbidities poten- tially attributable to cortisol).
- Adrenal surgery is considered.
- Evidence of significant tumor growth during follow-up imaging.
The core multidisciplinary team should consist of a radiolo- gist, an endocrinologist, and a surgeon, all with significant ex- perience in the management of adrenal tumors.
1.2. Assessment of the risk of malignancy
· R.2.1 We recommend aiming to establish with the highest possible certainty if an adrenal mass is benign or malig- nant at the time of initial detection.
. R.2.2 We recommend that all adrenal incidentalomas undergo an imaging procedure to determine if the mass is homogeneous and lipid-rich and therefore benign (+00O). For this purpose, we recommend the use of noncontrast CT as the first imaging modality if not yet performed (0000).
. R.2.3 We recommend that if the noncontrast CT is con- sistent with a benign adrenal mass (homogenous appear- ance and Hounsfield units [HU] ≤ 10), no further imaging is required (+000).
· R.2.4 If CT demonstrates a homogeneous adrenal mass with unenhanced HU between 11 and 20 and a tumor size < 4 cm, and the results of the hormonal work-up do not indicate significant hormone excess, we suggest an imme- diate additional imaging to avoid any follow-up imaging (@OOO). Alternatively, interval imaging in 12 months by noncontrast CT (or MRI) could be performed.
. R.2.5 If the adrenal mass is ≥4 cm and heterogeneous or has unenhanced HU> 20, there is a relevant risk that this lesion is malignant. Therefore, we suggest discussing such cases in a multidisciplinary team meeting. In most cases, immediate surgery will be the management of choice, but in some patients, additional imaging might be an option (@OOO). Prior to surgery, we suggest com- pletely staging the patient (including at least thoracic CT and/or FDG-PET/CT [@OOO]). If surgery is not
performed, follow up imaging in 6-12 months is recom- mended (+000).
. R.2.6 In adrenal masses that do not fall in one of the cat- egories above (eg, tumor size ≥ 4 cm with unenhanced HU 11-20; or tumor size <4 cm with unenhanced HU>20; or tumor size < 4 cm with heterogeneous ap- pearance), we suggest an individualized approach with discussion in a multidisciplinary team meeting (@OOO). The likelihood of a malignant tumor is still low. Therefore, in most cases, immediate additional im- aging according to the center expertise and availability is the preferred option. If the tumor is still judged as inde- terminate mass and surgery is not performed, we recom- mend interval imaging in 6-12 months (noncontrast CT/ MRI) (+000).
. R.2.7 We recommend against the use of an adrenal biopsy in the diagnostic work-up of patients with adrenal masses unless there is a history of extra-adrenal malignancy (see R.6.3.5).
· R.2.8 We suggest measurement of sex steroids and pre- cursors of steroidogenesis (ideally using multisteroid pro- filing by tandem mass spectrometry) in patients in whom by imaging or clinical features an adrenocortical carcin- oma is suspected (+000).
1.3. Assessment for hormone excess
. R.3.1 We recommend that every patient with an adrenal incidentaloma should undergo careful assessment includ- ing clinical examination for symptoms and signs of ad- renal hormone excess.
· R.3.2 We recommend that patients with adrenal inciden- talomas undergo a 1-mg overnight dexamethasone sup- pression test to exclude autonomous cortisol secretion (+00O). In frail patients with limited life expectancy, this test may not be warranted.
. R.3.3 We recommend interpretation of the results of the 1-mg overnight dexamethasone test as a continuous ra- ther than categorical (yes/no) variable (+000). However, we recommend using serum cortisol levels post dexamethasone ≤50 nmol/L (≤1.8 µg/dL) as a diag- nostic criterion for the exclusion of autonomous cortisol secretion (+000).
· R.3.4 We recommend that in patients without signs and symptoms of overt Cushing’s syndrome a postdexame- thasone serum cortisol concentration above 50 nmol/L (> 1.8 µg/dL) should be considered as MACS without any further stratification based on the degree of cortisol nonsuppressibility (+@OO). In these patients, we recom- mend that ACTH-independency should be confirmed. Conditions that alter the results of the 1 mg DST should be considered for the interpretation of the results of the test. A repeat DST to confirm cortisol secretory autonomy is recommended. Additional biochemical tests to assess the degree of cortisol secretion might be useful. However, for clinical management the presence of co- morbidities potentially attributable to cortisol excess, age, and the general condition of the patient are major factors for clinical decision-making.
· R.3.5 We recommend against considering patients with MACS (per definition without specific clinical signs of
Cushing’s syndrome) as being at high risk for develop- ment of overt Cushing’s syndrome (+000).
· R.3.6 We recommend screening patients with adrenal in- cidentaloma and MACS for hypertension and type 2 dia- betes mellitus (+@OO) and suggest offering appropriate treatment of these conditions.
· R.3.7 We suggest screening patients with adrenal inciden- taloma and MACS for vertebral fractures (9000) and to consider appropriate treatment of these conditions (Đ000).
. R.3.8 We recommend discussing the option of surgery with the patient who has MACS in addition to relevant comorbidities and a unilateral adrenal mass (Đ000). Age, sex, general health, degree and persistence of non- suppressible cortisol after dexamethasone, severity of co- morbidities, and patient’s preference should be taken into account (ĐO00). In all cases, the proposal to perform surgery should be established within an expert multidis- ciplinary group.
· R.3.9 We recommend excluding pheochromocytoma by measurement of plasma free metanephrines or urinary fractionated metanephrines in all patients with adrenal le- sions with features not typical for a benign adenoma.
· R.3.10 In patients with concomitant hypertension or un- explained hypokalemia, we recommend use of the aldos- terone/renin ratio to evaluate primary aldosteronism.
1.4. Surgical treatment
. R.4.1 We recommend adrenalectomy as the standard of care for unilateral adrenal tumors with clinically signifi- cant hormone excess. In patients with MACS, surgery can be considered in patients with relevant co-morbid- ities, taking into account individual factors (detailed in R.3.8).
· R.4.2 We recommend against performing surgery in pa- tients with an asymptomatic, nonfunctioning unilateral adrenal mass and obvious benign features on imaging studies (+000).
· R.4.3 If surgery is indicated for a benign adrenal mass causing hormone excess (including MACS), we recom- mend that a minimally invasive approach is used (Đ000).
· R.4.4 We suggest that minimally invasive adrenalectomy is performed by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients with unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy (R2.4-6) and a diam- eter ≤6 cm, but without evidence of local invasion (9000).
· R.4.5 We recommend open adrenalectomy is performed by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon for unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy and signs of local invasion (+000).
· R.4.6 We recommend discussion of an individualized sur- gical approach by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients that do not fall in one of the above-mentioned categories in a multidisciplinary expert team meeting (0000).
· R.4.7 We recommend perioperative glucocorticoid treat- ment at surgical stress doses in all patients undergoing surgery and a preoperative morning serum cortisol
>50 nmol/L (1.8 u/dL) after a 1 mg overnight dexametha- sone test.
· R.4.8 We suggest that patients with MACS (similarly to patients with adrenal Cushing’s syndrome) that under- went surgery should be followed by an endocrinologist until recovery of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function has been documented.
1.5. Follow-up of patients not undergoing adrenal surgery after initial assessment
· R.5.1 We recommend against further imaging during follow-up in patients with an adrenal lesion with clear be- nign features on imaging studies (+000).
· R.5.2 In patients with an indeterminate adrenal mass (by imaging), opting not to undergo adrenalectomy following initial assessment, we suggest one repeat noncontrast CT or MRI after 6-12 months to exclude significant growth (ĐOOO). We suggest surgical resection if the lesion en- larges by more than 20% in maximum diameter (in add- ition to at least a 5 mm increase in maximum diameter) during this period. If there is growth of the lesion below this threshold, additional imaging again after 6-12 months might be considered.
· R.5.3 We recommend against repeated hormonal work- up in patients with hormonal work-up results within the reference range at initial evaluation unless new clinical signs of endocrine activity appear or there is worsening of comorbidities (eg, hypertension, type 2 diabetes) (+000).
· R.5.4 In patients with MACS, who do not undergo an adrenalectomy, we recommend only annual reassessment of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol (+ĐOO). For this purpose, we suggest that discharge from specialized endocrine follow-up be considered and that monitoring of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol could be undertaken by primary health care providers, if adequate surveillance for comorbidities is available in the community (@OOO). If these comorbid- ities develop or worsen, referral to an endocrinologist is suggested to reassess the endocrine status and reconsider the potential benefit of intervention.
1.6. Special circumstances
1.6.1. Patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas
. R.6.1.1 We recommend that for patients with bilateral or multiple adrenal masses each adrenal lesion is assessed in- dividually at the time of initial detection according to the same imaging protocol as for unilateral adrenal masses to establish whether each nodule is benign or malignant.
. R.6.1.2 We recommend that all patients with bilateral ad- renal incidentalomas should undergo clinical and hormo- nal assessment identical to that in patients with unilateral adrenal incidentaloma.
· R.6.1.3 We suggest approaching bilateral disease accord- ing to the following 4-option schema based on the results of the imaging and hormonal work-up (1) bilateral (mac- ronodular) hyperplasia, (2) bilateral adrenal adenomas,
(3) 2 morphologically similar, but nonadenoma-like ad- renal masses, and (4) 2 morphologically different adrenal masses. In patients who do not fall in one of these categor- ies, an individualized management plan is needed.
. R.6.1.4 For patients with bilateral hyperplasia without autonomous cortisol secretion, we suggest measuring 17-hydroxyprogesterone to exclude congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency.
· R.6.1.5 For patients with bilateral (macronodular) hyper- plasia or bilateral adenomas, we recommend assessment of comorbidities that are potentially attributable to MACS.
· R.6.1.6 In patients with bilateral metastases, lymphoma, infiltrative inflammatory disease, and hemorrhages, we recommend assessment for adrenal insufficiency.
· R.6.1.7 In patients with bilateral hyperplasia or bilateral adenomas and MACS, we suggest individualization of specific treatment options based on age, sex, degree of cortisol autonomy, general condition, comorbidities, and patient preference.
· R.6.1.8. We suggest against bilateral adrenalectomy in patients without clinical signs of overt Cushing’s syndrome.
1.6.2 Adrenal incidentalomas in young or elderly patients
· R.6.2.1 We recommend urgent assessment of an adrenal mass in pregnant women and individuals <40 years of age because of a higher likelihood of malignancy as well as and clinically significant hormone excess.
. R.6.2.2 We suggest the use of MRI rather than CT in chil- dren, adolescents, and pregnant women if dedicated ad- renal imaging is required.
· R.6.2.3 We suggest surgical resection if an adrenal mass is indeterminate on imaging in children, adolescents, preg- nant women, and adults < 40 years of age.
· R.6.2.4 We recommend that investigation and manage- ment of patients with poor general health and a high de- gree of frailty be kept in proportion to potential clinical gain.
1.6.3. Patients with newly diagnosed adrenal mass and a history of extra-adrenal malignancy
· R.6.3.1 We recommend measurement of plasma or urin- ary metanephrines to exclude pheochromocytoma in pa- tients with extra-adrenal malignancy with an indeterminate mass, even if the adrenal mass is likely to be a metastasis. We suggest additional hormonal work-up based on an individualized approach.
. R.6.3.2 We recommend that in patients with a history of extra-adrenal malignancy, adrenal lesions characterized as benign by noncontrast CT require no further specific adrenal imaging follow-up.
· R.6.3.3 In patients with a history of extra-adrenal malig- nancy, strong FDG uptake in the adrenal gland(s) on PET-CT is suggestive of metastasis. In case of moderate or no FDG uptake, further work-up with at least unen- hanced CT is recommended.
· R.6.3.4 For indeterminate lesions in patients with a his- tory of extra-adrenal malignancy, in whom the clinical management will be altered by the demonstration that the adrenal lesion is malignant, we suggest performing ei- ther an FDG-PET/CT (if not done already), surgical resec- tion, or a biopsy (see also R.6.3.5). In all other patients, we recommend imaging follow-up at the same interval as imaging for the primary malignancy.
· R.6.3.5 We recommend that 3 key criteria be fulfilled be- fore adrenal biopsy is considered: (1) the lesion is hormo- nally inactive (in particular, a pheochromocytoma has been excluded), (2) the lesion has not been conclusively characterized as benign by imaging, and (3) clinical man- agement of the patient would be altered by knowledge of the histology.
. R.6.3.6 We recommend assessment of residual adrenal function in patients with large bilateral metastases.
1.8. Key changes between the guideline versions 2016 and 2023
See Table 1.
2. Adrenal incidentaloma-clinical presentation and terminology
2.1 Definition, etiology, and epidemiology of adrenal incidentalomas
An adrenal incidentaloma is an adrenal mass detected on im- aging not performed for a suspected adrenal disease. By this strict definition, the imaging study is not done for signs and symptoms potentially indicative of adrenal hormone excess (eg, pheochromocytoma, Cushing’s, or Conn’s syndrome) or an otherwise suspected adrenal disease, but rather for the evaluation of symptoms that are not suggestive of an adrenal problem, such as investigations for abdominal or back pain or for exclusion of pulmonary embolism or other lung disease. Conversely, discovery of an adrenal mass upon screening im- aging in patients with a hereditary syndrome associated with an increased likelihood to develop adrenal tumors falls outside the definition of an adrenal incidentaloma. Similarly, adrenal masses discovered on imaging for tumor evaluation in extra- adrenal malignancies (“tumor staging” or follow-up) do not meet the strict definition of adrenal incidentaloma. However, as this is a clinically frequent scenario, we will ad- dress this in a specific section (see R.5.6.3).
The previous and current guidelines applied an arbitrary work-up threshold of 1 cm, because we and others consider that it is reasonable to perform additional diagnostic work-up only in adrenal masses ≥ 1 cm, unless clinical signs and symp- toms suggestive of adrenal hormone excess are present.
The etiology of adrenal incidentalomas varies and includes benign and malignant lesions derived from the adrenal cortex or medulla or masses of extra-adrenal origin (Table 2). Reported frequencies vary, depending on the context of the study and inclusion criteria. As expected, the prevalence of ad- renal hormone excess in adrenal incidentaloma series originat- ing from referral centers is much higher than those originating from unselected incidentaloma populations. Notably, the ma- jority of patients with adrenal incidentalomas still do not undergo the recommended hormonal workup.1
| Guideline 2016 | Guideline 2022 (relevant changes highlighted in bold) | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| R.2.2 We recommend that all adrenal incidentalomas undergo an imaging procedure to determine if the mass is homogeneous and lipid-rich and therefore benign (@000). For this purpose, we primarily recommend the use of noncontrast CT (@000). | R.2.2 We recommend that all adrenal incidentalomas undergo an imaging procedure to determine if the mass is homogeneous and lipid-rich and therefore benign (+00O). For this purpose, we recommend the use of noncontrast CT as the first imaging modality if not yet performed (9000). R.2.3 We recommend that if the noncontrast CT is consistent with a benign adrenal mass (homogenous appearance and HUs ≤ 10) no further imaging is required (+000). | Increased level of incidence. Adapted criteria and increased the strength of recommendation and level of evidence. |
| R.2.3 We suggest that if the noncontrast CT is consistent with a benign adrenal mass (HUS ≤ 10) that is homogeneous and smaller than 4 cm no further imaging is required (+000). | ||
| R.2.4 If the adrenal mass is indeterminate on noncontrast CT and the results of the hormonal work-up do not indicate significant hormone excess, 3 options should be considered by a multidisciplinary team acknowledging the patient's clinical context: immediate additional imaging with another modality, interval imaging in 6-12 months (noncontrast CT or MRI), or surgery without further delay. | R.2.4 If CT demonstrates a homogeneous adrenal mass with unenhanced HU between 11 and 20 and a tumor size < 4 cm, and the results of the hormonal work-up do not indicate significant hormone excess, we suggest an immediate additional imaging to avoid any follow-up imaging (@OOO). Alternatively, interval imaging in 12 months by noncontrast CT (or MRI) could be performed. R.2.5 If the adrenal mass is ≥ 4 cm and heterogeneous or has unenhanced HU > 20, there is a relevant risk that this lesion is malignant. Therefore, we suggest discussing such cases in a multidisciplinary team meeting. In most cases, immediate surgery will be the management of choice, but in some patients, additional imaging might be an option (@OOO). Prior to surgery, we suggest completely staging the patient (including at least thoracic CT and/or FDG-PET/CT (@O0O)). If surgery is not performed, follow up imaging in 6-12 months is recommended (+000). R.2.6 In adrenal masses that do not fall in one of the categories above (eg, tumor size ≥ 4 cm with unenhanced HU 11-20; or tumor size < 4 cm with unenhanced HU > 20; or tumor size < 4 cm with heterogeneous appearance), we suggest an individualized approach with discussion in a multidisciplinary team meeting (ĐO00). The likelihood of a malignant tumor is still low. Therefore, In most cases, immediate additional imaging according to the center expertise and availability is the preferred option. If the tumor is still judged as indeterminate mass and surgery is not performed, we recommend interval imaging in 6-12 months (noncontrast CT/ MRI) (+000). | Major modification. |
| R.3.2 We recommend that all patients with adrenal incidentalomas undergo a 1-mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test to exclude cortisol excess (+000). | R.3.2 We recommend that patients with adrenal incidentalomas undergo a 1-mg overnight dexamethasone suppression test to exclude autonomous cortisol secretion (+000). In frail patients with limited life expectancy, this test may not be warranted. | Increased level of evidence and added a statement on frail patients. |
| R.3.3 We suggest interpretation of the results of the 1-mg overnight dexamethasone test as a continuous rather than categorical (yes/no) variable (@OOO). However, we recommend using serum cortisol levels post dexamethasone ≤ 50 nmol/L (≤ 1.8 µg/dL) as a diagnostic criterion for the exclusion of autonomous cortisol secretion (+000). | R.3.3 We recommend interpretation of the results of the 1-mg overnight dexamethasone test as a continuous rather than categorical (yes/no) variable (ĐO00). However, we recommend using serum cortisol levels post dexamethasone ≤ 50 nmol/L (≤ 1.8 µg/dL) as a diagnostic criterion for the exclusion of autonomous cortisol secretion (+000). | Increased the strength of recommendation. |
| R.3.4 We suggest that post dexamethasone serum cortisol levels between 51 and 138 nmol/L (1.9-5.0 µg/dL) should be considered as evidence of "possible autonomous cortisol secretion" and cortisol levels post dexamethasone > 138 nmol/L (> 5.0 µg/dL) should be taken as evidence of "autonomous cortisol secretion." Additional biochemical tests to confirm cortisol secretory autonomy and assess the degree of cortisol secretion might be required. However, for the clinical | R.3.4 We recommend that in patients without signs and symptoms of overt Cushing's syndrome a postdexamethasone serum cortisol concentration above 50 nmol/L (> 1.8 µg/dL) should be considered as MACS without any further stratification based on the degree of cortisol nonsuppressibility (+000). In these patients, we recommend that ACTH-independency should be confirmed. Conditions that alter the results of the 1 mg DST should considered for the interpretation of the results of the test. A repeat DST to confirm cortisol secretory autonomy is | Major modification. |
| Guideline 2016 | Guideline 2022 (relevant changes highlighted in bold) | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| management the presence of potentially cortisol-related comorbidities and age of the patient are of major importance. | recommended. Additional biochemical tests to assess the degree of cortisol secretion might be useful. However, for clinical management the presence of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol excess, age, and the general condition of the patient are major factors for clinical decision-making. | |
| R.3.5 We recommend against considering "autonomous cortisol secretion" as a condition with a high risk for the development of overt Cushing's syndrome (+000). | R.3.5 We recommend against considering patients with MACS (per definition without specific clinical signs of Cushing's syndrome) as being at high risk for development of overt Cushing's syndrome (+000). | Increased level of evidence. |
| R.3.6 We recommend screening patients with "possible autonomous cortisol secretion" or "autonomous cortisol secretion" for hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus (@OOO) and suggest offering appropriate treatment of these conditions. | R.3.6 We recommend screening patients with adrenal incidentaloma and MACS for hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus (+@OO) and suggest offering appropriate treatment of these conditions. | Increased level of evidence. |
| R.3.8 We suggest an individualized approach to consider patients with "autonomous cortisol secretion" due to a benign adrenal adenoma and comorbidities potentially related to cortisol excess for adrenal surgery (+000). | R.3.8 We recommend discussing the option of surgery with the patient who has MACS in addition to relevant comorbidities and a unilateral adrenal mass (+000). Age, sex, general health, degree and persistence of nonsuppressible cortisol after dexamethasone, severity of comorbidities and patient's preference should be taken into account (@OOO). In all cases, the proposal to perform surgery should be established within an expert multidisciplinary group. | Major modification. |
| Age, degree of cortisol excess, general health, comorbidities and patient's preference should be taken into account. In all patients considered for surgery, ACTH-independency of cortisol excess should be confirmed. | ||
| R.3.9 We recommend excluding pheochromocytoma by measurement of plasma free metanephrines or urinary fractionated metanephrines. | R.3.9 We recommend excluding pheochromocytoma by measurement of plasma free metanephrines or urinary fractionated metanephrines in all patients with adrenal lesions with features not typical for a benign adenoma. | Restriction to a subset of patients. |
| R.3.11 We suggest measurement of sex hormones and steroid precursors in patients with clinical or imaging features suggestive of adrenocortical carcinoma. | R.2.7 We suggest measurement of sex steroids and precursors of steroidogenesis (ideally using multi-steroid profiling by tandem mass spectrometry) in patients in whom based on imaging or clinical features an adrenocortical carcinoma is suspected (+000). | Moved from section 5.3 to 5.2, slightly modified the text and provided evidence level. |
| R.4.2 We recommend against performing surgery in patients with an asymptomatic, nonfunctioning unilateral adrenal mass and obvious benign features on imaging studies (Đ000). | R.4.2 We recommend against performing surgery in patients with an asymptomatic, nonfunctioning unilateral adrenal mass and obvious benign features on imaging studies (+000). | Increased level of evidence. |
| R.4.3 If surgery is indicated for a benign adrenal mass causing hormone excess (including MACS), we recommend that a minimally invasive approach is used (@000). | New recommendation. | |
| R.4.3 We suggest performing laparoscopic adrenalectomy in patients with unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy and a diameter ≤ 6 cm, but without evidence of local invasion (Đ000). | R.4.4 We suggest that minimally invasive adrenalectomy is performed by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients with unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy (R2.4-6) and a diameter ≤ 6 cm, but without evidence of local invasion (9000). | Clarified language regarding minimally invasive adrenalectomy and added "expert high-volume adrenal surgeon." |
| R.4.5 We suggest an individualized approach in patients that do not fall in one of the above-mentioned categories (+000). | R.4.6 We recommend discussion of an individualized surgical approach by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients that do not fall in one of the above-mentioned categories in a multidisciplinary expert team meeting (+000). | Increased the strength of recommendation and added "expert high-volume adrenal surgeon." |
| R.4.8 We suggest that patients with MACS (similarly to patients with adrenal Cushing's syndrome) that underwent surgery should be followed by an endocrinologist until recovery of hypothalamic- pituitary-adrenal axis function has been documented. | New recommendation. | |
| R.5.1 We suggest against further imaging for follow-up in patients with an adrenal mass < 4 cm with clear benign features on imaging studies (+000). | R.5.1 We recommend against further imaging during follow-up in patients with an adrenal lesion with clear benign features on imaging studies (+000). | Increased the strength of recommendation and level of evidence; skipped size cutoff. |
| R.5.3 We suggest against repeated hormonal work-up in patients with a normal hormonal | R.5.3 We recommend against repeated hormonal work-up in patients with hormonal work-up results | Increased the strength of |
| Guideline 2016 | Guideline 2022 (relevant changes highlighted in bold) | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| work-up at initial evaluation unless new clinical signs of endocrine activity appear or there is worsening of comorbidities (eg, hypertension and type 2 diabetes) (+000). R.5.4 In patients with "autonomous cortisol secretion" without signs of overt Cushing's syndrome, we suggest annual clinical reassessment for cortisol excess comorbidities potentially related to cortisol excess (+000). Based on the outcome of this evaluation the potential benefit of surgery should be considered. | within the reference range at initial evaluation unless new clinical signs of endocrine activity appear or there is worsening of comorbidities (eg, hypertension, type 2 diabetes) (+000). R.5.4 In patients with MAC, who do not undergo an adrenalectomy, we recommend only annual reassessment of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol (+@OO). For this purpose, we suggest that discharge from specialized endocrine follow-up be considered and that monitoring of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol could be undertaken by primary health care providers, if adequate surveillance for comorbidities is available in the community (ĐOOO). If these comorbidities develop or worsen, referral to an endocrinologist is suggested to reassess the endocrine status and reconsider the potential benefit of intervention. | recommendation and level of evidence. Major modifications. |
| R.6.1.2 We recommend that all patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas should undergo clinical and hormonal assessment identical to that in patients with unilateral adrenal incidentaloma. The same applies for the assessment of comorbidities that might be related to autonomous cortisol secretion. In addition, 17-hydroxyprogesterone should be measured to exclude congenital adrenal hyperplasia, and testing for adrenal insufficiency should be considered, if suspected on clinical grounds or if imaging suggests bilateral infiltrative disease or hemorrhages. | R.6.1.2 We recommend that all patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas should undergo clinical and hormonal assessment identical to that in patients with unilateral adrenal incidentaloma. R.6.1.3 We suggest approaching bilateral disease according to the following 4-option schema based on the results of the imaging and hormonal work-up (i) bilateral (macronodular) hyperplasia, (ii) bilateral adrenal adenomas, (iii) 2 morphologically similar, but nonadenoma-like adrenal masses, (iv) 2 morphologically different adrenal masses. In patients who do not fall in one of these categories, an individualized management plan is needed. R.6.1.4 For patients with bilateral hyperplasia without autonomous cortisol secretion, we suggest measuring 17-hydroxyprogesterone to exclude congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency. R.6.1.5 For patients with bilateral (macronodular) hyperplasia or bilateral adenomas, we recommend assessment of comorbidities that are potentially attributable to MACS. R.6.1.6 In patients with bilateral metastases, lymphoma, infiltrative inflammatory disease and hemorrhages, we recommend assessment for adrenal insufficiency. | Major modifications and new recommendations. |
| R.6.1.3 We suggest that for patients with bilateral incidentaloma the same recommendations regarding the indication for surgery and follow-up are used as for patients with unilateral adrenal incidentalomas. R.6.1.4 We suggest that in patients with bilateral adrenal masses bilateral adrenalectomy is not performed for ACTH-independent "autonomous cortisol secretion" without clinical signs of overt Cushing's syndrome. In selected patients, a unilateral adrenalectomy of the dominant lesion might be considered using an individualized approach considering age, degree of cortisol excess, general condition, comorbidities and patient preference. | R.6.1.7 In patients with bilateral hyperplasia or bilateral adenomas and MACS, we suggest individualization of specific treatment options based on age, sex, degree of cortisol autonomy, general condition, comorbidities and patient preference. R6.1.8. We suggest against bilateral adrenalectomy in patients without clinical signs of overt Cushing's syndrome. R.6.2.3 We suggest surgical resection if an adrenal mass is indeterminate on imaging in children, adolescents, pregnant women and adults < 40 years of age. | Major modifications. New recommendation. |
| R.6.3.4 For indeterminate lesions in patients with a history of extra-adrenal malignancy, we recommend imaging follow-up assessing the potential growth of the lesion at the same interval as imaging for the primary malignancy. Alternatively, FDG-PET/CT, surgical resection or a biopsy (see also R.6.3.5) can be considered. | R.6.3.4 For indeterminate lesions in patients with a history of extra-adrenal malignancy, in whom the clinical management will be altered by the demonstration that the adrenal lesion is malignant, we suggest performing either an FDG-PET/CT (if not done already), surgical resection or a biopsy (see also R.6.3.5). In all other patients, we recommend imaging follow-up at the same interval as imaging for the primary malignancy. | Emphasized subgroup of patients in whom alteration of management might occur. |
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/ejendo/article/189/1/G1/7198474 by guest on 28 April 2024
| Etiology | Prevalence of the different entities among adrenal incidentalomas |
|---|---|
| Adrenocortical adenoma or macronodular bilateral adrenal | 80%-85% |
| hyperplasia | |
| · Nonfunctioning | 40%-70% |
| . Mild autonomous cortisol secretion | 20%-50% |
| · Primary aldosteronism | 2%-5% |
| · Overt Cushing's syndrome | 1%-4% |
| Other benign mass | |
| · Myelolipoma | 3%-6% |
| · Cyst and pseudocyst | 1% |
| · Ganglioneuroma | 1% |
| · Schwannoma | <1% |
| · Hemorrhage | <1% |
| Pheochromocytoma | 1%-5% |
| Adrenocortical carcinoma | 0.4%-4% |
| Other malignant mass (mostly adrenal metastases) | 3%-7% |
aBased on references1-14 Due to different selection criteria and the fact that different studies used different definitions of hormone excess, the range of the reported prevalence is particularly wide. Furthermore, these studies might be highly susceptible to selection, referral and reporting bias.
The incidence and prevalence of adrenal masses can only be extrapolated from unselected imaging or autopsy studies. Autopsy studies suggest an overall prevalence of adrenal masses of around 2% (range 1.0%-8.7%), which increases with age.15-17 In a population study, the incidence of detected adrenal tumors was reported to increase 10-fold between 1995 and 2017, mainly representing adrenal incidentalomas, due to the growing number of the cross-sectional abdominal imaging scans in the population.1 Radiological studies in pa- tients report that prevalence of adrenal incidentalomas is around 3% in adults > 50 years and up to 10% in patients >80 years.15-23 Estimates from the radiological studies have to be interpreted carefully due to the underlying imaging bias and potential underreporting.24
In contrast to most imaging studies, a recent publication from China investigated healthy individuals who underwent abdominal CT imaging as part of a funded health check,2 in- cluding 25 356 participants between age 18 and 78, with de- tection of an adrenal tumor in 351 (1.4%). The prevalence increased with age, from 0.2% in the youngest group (18-25 years) to 3.2% in those older than 65 years. In children, ad- renal tumors are very rare and mostly not incidentalomas.‘
2.2. Remarks on terminology
As discussed above, the term “adrenal incidentaloma” can be defined by very restrictive criteria but is sometimes used in a much broader sense, referring to any adrenal mass. Therefore, in this guideline we frequently speak of adrenal masses or lesions. As an overarching term for an adrenal tu- mor that secretes hormones in an autonomous/unregulated manner we decided to use the term “functioning tumor.”
As indicated in Table 2, there is a substantial subset of pa- tients with adrenal adenomas, in whom hypercortisolism can be detected during endocrine work-up, although these patients have no clinical signs or symptoms of Cushing’s syndrome at presentation. In the 2016 European Society of
Endocrinology (ESE)-European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumours (ENSAT) guidelines, we decided to avoid the terms “subclinical” or “preclinical” Cushing’s syndrome to describe these patients, because there is strong evidence that this condition is quite different from overt Cushing’s syn- drome and that these patients very rarely develop overt Cushing’s syndrome.19,25-32 In addition to common comorbidities like hypertension, obesity, and diabetes, overt Cushing’s syndrome is usually associated with catabolic symp- toms such as muscle weakness, skin fragility, osteoporosis, and comes with severe morbidity and clearly elevated mortal- ity.33-37 Thus, we introduced the term “autonomous cortisol secretion,” which was widely used in publications of the last 7 years. These studies provided more evidence about the asso- ciation of this condition and several metabolic comorbidities, as well as increased mortality (see below for details). Although we recognize that cortisol secretion may not be truly autono- mous, being regulated by various aberrant hormone receptors, particularly in case of bilateral masses,38 we consider the term autonomous as indicative that cortisol secretion is not under the physiological control of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis.
In the 2016 guidelines, we discriminated between “autono- mous cortisol secretion” (defined by cortisol after 1 mg DST > 5.0 µg/dL) and “possible autonomous cortisol secretion” (cor- tisol after 1 mg DST 1.9-5.0 µg/dL). However, recent studies suggested that also the category “possible autonomous corti- sol secretion” is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality12,39,40 and therefore we have removed this distinction.
Due to the fact that the term “autonomous cortisol secre- tion” might include also patients with overt Cushing syn- drome, we now decided to add the word “mild” before autonomous cortisol secretion and use the abbreviation MACS throughout the recommendations.
2.3. Short overview on adrenal imaging
For the differentiation of malignant from benign adrenal tu- mors there are still 3 main imaging techniques in mainstream clinical use: CT, MRI, and positron emission tomography with [18F]2-deoxy-D-glucose (mostly combined with CT; FDG-PET/CT). CT and MRI are techniques mainly aiming to identify benign lesions, therefore representing tools de- signed for the exclusion of adrenal malignancy.1,8,41-44 Conversely, FDG-PET/CT is mainly used for the detection of malignant disease. 45-5
CT has a high spatial and quantitative contrast resolution, which allows assessment of tissue density by measuring X-ray absorption of tissues. This allows calculation of tissue attenuation or tissue density values, which are measured in HUs and quantify X-ray absorption of tissues compared to water, which is conventionally allocated a HU value of 0. Noncontrast (or “unenhanced”) CT is currently the most reliable imaging tool for adrenal tumors (see details below, Section 4.1.1).
Standard contrast-enhanced CT is usually not helpful to dis- criminate benign from malignant adrenal tumors. However, CT with a delayed washout analysis is suggested for this pur- pose. Typically, adenomas take up intravenous CT contrast rapidly, but also have a rapid loss of contrast-a phenomenon termed “contrast enhancement washout.” Malignant adrenal lesions usually enhance rapidly but demonstrate a slower washout of contrast medium. This washout phenomenon
can be quantified by “contrast washout values,” which involve lesion attenuation measurements at specific time points ac- quired in a dedicated adrenal CT: prior to injection of contrast medium (HUnativ), at 60 seconds following injection of con- trast medium (HUmax) and then at 10 or 15 minutes after con- trast injection. This allows calculation of the relative contrast enhancement washout (=100 x [HUmax-HU10/15min]/HUmax) and absolute contrast enhancement washout (=100 x [HUmax-HU10/15min]/[HUmax-HUnativ]). Details about the most suitable cutoffs are provided in Section 4.1.1.
MRI is a nonionizing radiation-based imaging modality utilizing weak radio wave signals emitted by body tissues when the body is placed in a strong magnetic field and radio frequency pulses are applied. The advantages of MRI over CT are its lack of radiation exposure, lack of iodine-based contrast media, and its superior tissue contrast resolution. Longer scanning times, claustrophobia, and in-situ MRI in- compatible devices are the main disadvantages of MRI. For the differentiation of benign and malignant adrenal masses the MRI technique of chemical-shift imaging is most common- ly used.53-58 Chemical shift imaging relies on the fact that, within magnetic fields, protons in water vibrate at a slightly different frequency than protons in lipid. As a result, water and fat protons oscillate in and out of phase with respect to one another. Adrenal adenomas with a high content of intra- cellular lipid usually lose signal intensity on out-of-phase im- ages compared to in-phase images, whereas malignant lesions and pheochromocytomas (but also some lipid-poor ad- renal adenomas) that lack intracellular lipid remain un- changed and retain their signal.41,57,59 MR signal intensity units are arbitrary units, unlike CT, and therefore are subject to numerous technical variations. Simple visual assessment of signal intensity loss is diagnostic in most cases, reserving quan- titative methods to less clear-cut cases. Quantitative analysis can be made using the adrenal-to-spleen signal ratio and the signal intensity index.
[18F]FDG-PET is a nuclear medicine modality that provides quantitative tomographic images after intravenous injection of a beta plus (positron)-radiation emitting radiotracer (18-fluorine) used to label 2-deoxy-D-glucose rendering Fluoro-DeoxyGlucose ([18F]FDG). Both glucose and deoxy- glucose enter cells via transmembrane glucose transporters and undergo phosphorylation but while glucose undergoes further enzymatic breakdown, deoxyglucose becomes trapped in intracellular compartments. Cancer cells have an increased requirement for glucose and, therefore, take up more glucose and deoxyglucose than normal cells.60 However, FDG is not a specific marker for cancer cells but a marker only for increased glucose metabolism. Thus, uptake can also be increased in cells with an increased energy requirement due to conditions other than cancer, for example, active infection. Quantitative measurement of 18F concentrations within tis- sues provides the most commonly used clinical measurement index, standard uptake value (SUV), which compares the in- tensity of uptake of 18F in the adrenal lesion to the average up- take of whole body. Standard uptake value values have been utilized to differentiate between benign from malignant ad- renal lesions. FDG-PET alone has a high sensitivity for detec- tion of metabolic changes but its spatial resolution for anatomical localization is poor. The solution is a hardware fu- sion between PET and CT (PET/CT) allowing simultaneous acquisition of PET and CT data. In clinical practice, this in- volves injecting patients with FDG tracers at least 1 hour prior
to the start of combined PET/CT. In addition to its diagnostic potential to discriminate between benign from malignant ad- renal lesions, FDG-PET/CT can help-in case of a suspected adrenocortical carcinoma or pheochromocytoma-to identify metastases, and-in case suspected adrenal metastases-to de- tect the primary tumor.
Other potentially emerging imaging techniques (eg, metomidate-based adrenal imaging) are not yet clinically widely available and, therefore, will not be considered in this guideline.
2.4. Remarks on the difficulties with hormonal testing
Hormone assessment is crucial in the context of the work-up for an adrenal incidentaloma. Several pitfalls have to be con- sidered (eg, daily rhythm, sex-/age-dependency, limitations of assays, drug interactions, preanalytic difficulties). Furthermore, normal ranges vary substantially, depending on the method used, so it is essential to interpret test results in the context of the appropriate reference range. We refer to other guidelines that have addressed these issues in more de- tail.61-64
3. Methods
3.1. Guideline working group
This guideline was developed by the ESE in collaboration with the ENSAT. The chairs of the guideline panel Martin Fassnacht (clinical) and Olaf Dekkers (methodology) were ap- pointed by the ESE Clinical Committee. The other members were suggested by the chairs and approved by the Clinical Committee of ESE: endocrinologists (Wiebke Arlt [United Kingdom], Irina Bancos [United States], Ljiljana Marina [Serbia], John Newell-Price [United Kingdom], Antoine Tabarin [France], Massimo Terzolo [Italy], Stylianos Tsagarakis [Greece]), a radiologist (Anju Sahdev [United Kingdom]), an endocrine surgeon (Kerstin Lorenz [Germany]), and another methodologist (Iris Pelsma [The Netherlands]). Ljiljana Marina served as representative of the ESE Young Endocrinologists and Scientists and John Newell-Price as representative of the Endocrine Society. The systematic literature search was performed by Iris Pelsma su- pervised by Olaf Dekkers. The working group had several vir- tual meetings between September 2021 and April 2023 and 1 in-person meeting in October. Consensus was reached upon discussion; minority positions were taken into account in the Reasoning behind recommendations. Prior to the process, all participants completed conflict of interest forms (see Table S1).
3.2 Target group
This guideline was developed for healthcare providers of pa- tients with adrenal incidentalomas, that is, endocrinologists, radiologists, surgeons, and specialists in internal medicine. However, general practitioners might also find the guideline useful, as might our patients. In addition, the guideline docu- ment can serve as guidance for patient information leaflets. A draft of the guideline was reviewed by 3 experts in the field (see “Acknowledgment” section) and the endorsing societies (see Section 3.3) and has been submitted for comments to all mem- bers of ESE and ENSAT. All comments and suggestions were
subsequently discussed and implemented as appropriate by the panel (see Table S2).
3.3 Endorsement by other societies
To achieve wide acceptance of the guidelines within the clinic- al community of the different disciplines involved in the man- agement of adrenal incidentalomas, the draft of these guideline document was submitted to several other profession- al/learned societies. Finally, the following societies endorsed the presented guidelines: the Endocrine Society, the European Society of Urogenital Radiology, and the Society of Abdominal Radiology.
3.4 Aims
The overall purpose of this guideline is to provide clinicians with practical guidance for the management of patients with adrenal incidentalomas.
3.5 Summary of methods used for guideline development
This guideline is a revision of the 2016 guideline.65 The panel first decided which parts of the guideline were in need of revi- sion and which clinical questions needed an updated literature search (see Section 3.6).
The methods used for ESE guidelines have been described in more detail previously.66 In short, the guideline used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) as a methodological base. The first step was to de- fine the clinical question(s) (see Section 3.6), the second a sys- tematic literature search (see Section 3.7). After including relevant articles, we (1) estimated an average effect (or other measure such as incidence, diagnostic accuracy, etc.) for spe- cific outcomes (if possible), and (2) rated the quality of the evi- dence. The quality of evidence is classified as low very low (+000), low (+000), moderate (+000), and strong (+000).
For the recommendations we considered: (1) quality of the evidence, (2) balance of desirable and undesirable outcomes, and (3) values and preferences (patient preferences, goals for health, costs, management inconvenience, feasibility of imple- mentation, etc.).24,67 The recommendations are worded as recommend (strong recommendation) and suggest (weak rec- ommendation). Formal evidence syntheses were performed and graded only for recommendations addressing our initial questions. Recommendations based only on good practice or clinical experience of the panelists were not graded.68 Recommendations were derived from majority consensus of the guideline panel, but if members had substantive disagree- ments, this is acknowledged in the manuscript. All recommen- dations are accompanied by text explaining the rationale of specific recommendations.
3.6. Clinical question, eligibility criteria, and endpoint definition
At the beginning of the guideline development process in 2014 and for this revision in 2021, the panel agreed on the 4 most important clinical questions in the management of patients with adrenal incidentalomas (Table 3), for which a detailed lit- erature search was subsequently performed. A new clinical question (1c) regarding the diagnostic value of steroid
profiling was added. Questions 2a and 2b were addressed in a separate systematic review69 and are summarized in his guideline.
3.7 Description of search and selection of literature
A literature search in electronic medical databases was origin- ally performed for all 4 clinical questions for the guideline in 2016.65 For all questions, the search was updated, and the same databases were searched until July 2022 (Questions 3, 4), August 2022 (Questions 1a, 2), and November 2022 (Question 1b). A new systematic search (until August 2022) was added for studies on the diagnostic value of steroid profil- ing (1c). Details on the search strategy and the used databases are provided in Table S3. Summaries of included papers and evidence tables are provided in Tables S4-S15.
For all predefined clinical questions details of the yield of the search are shown in Table 3. In summary, we included 60 (20 new) studies for clinical Question 1 (CT 7, MRI 5, PET-CT 6, biopsy 40, steroid profiling 2); 46 (34 new) studies for clinical Question 2a (biochemical profile in adrenal incidentaloma); 11 studies (7 new) for clinical Question 2b (therapeutic ap- proaches for patients with MACS); 14 (5 new) studies for Question 3 (surgery); and 29 (18 new) studies, one being a sys- tematic review, for clinical Question 4 (follow-up).
4. Summary and conclusions from systematic reviews
4.1 Assessment of the risk of malignancy (Question 1)
4.1.1 Assessment of the risk of malignancy: imaging (Question 1a)
All studies of CT, MRI, or FDG-PET in adults were considered eligible if included patients underwent imaging for any indica- tions other than investigation of suspected adrenal mass and index imaging test characteristics were reported.
No randomized studies comparing imaging tests were iden- tified. Risk of bias ranged from low to high, with the majority having unclear or high risk of bias (mainly due to unclear population selection, retrospective selection of the diagnostic threshold and/or inadequate reference standards).
Four commonly used diagnostic thresholds were studied: (1) tumor density > 10 HU and > 20 HU on noncontrast CT; (2) CT with delayed contrast media washout: absolute percentage washout and/or relative percentage washout at any washout percentage or delay time on enhanced CT; (3) MRI chemical shift analysis: loss of signal intensity between in and out of phase images (including both qualitative and quantitative estimates of signal loss); and (4) FDG-PET or PET-CT: maximum SUV (SUVmax) or the ratio of SUVmax in the adrenal mass compared to the liver (adrenal liver ratio).
Overall, for incidentally discovered adrenal lesions, esti- mates of test performance are still based on a small number of studies. Only very few included patients with definitive diagnoses, thereby making it difficult to discern whether any imaging modality performs better than alternatives.
CT. We aimed to include studies that assessed diagnostic ac- curacy measures for the distinction of benign versus malignant adrenal lesions (adrenocortical carcinoma as well as other ma- lignancies) (Figure 1; Tables S4 and S5). Studies that assessed accuracy measures only for the distinction adrenocortical
| Clinical question | Predefined selection criteria and key outcome parametersª | Metrics of the literature search |
|---|---|---|
| Question 1a) | · Studies on imaging in patients with incidentally discovered adrenal mass(es), including patients undergoing staging for known extra-adrenal malignancy. · Sample size > 10 patients and <20% pheochromocytomas in total cohort · Diagnostic intervention: CT (noncontrast, contrast-enhanced, washout), MRI, FDG PET(CT), for specific imaging characteristics data in > 60% of patients · Reference standard: > 50% had histology or imaging-guided follow-up · Reporting 2 × 2 contingency table data or at least 2 indices of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, negative or positive predictive value) and disease prevalence. · Studies on patients with adrenal masses | · 1315 abstracts · 49 potentially relevant articles · 18 (including 10 new) studies included in systematic review and meta-analysis · Reasons for exclusion of articles were lack of test accuracy data, inadequate or unclear reference standard and ineligible populations. · 367 abstracts |
| What is the most accurate diagnostic imaging procedure to determine whether an adrenal mass is benign in patients with unilateral or bilateral adrenal mass(es) on imaging with or without history of other malignant lesions? Question 1b) | ||
| biopsy? What is the diagnostic accuracy of adrenal | undergoing an adrenal biopsy procedure · Outcomes: nondiagnostic rate, diagnostic accuracy data, complication rate · For studies included in the diagnostic accuracy analysis: 1) Reference standard: at least 50% of population either histology from adrenalectomy or autopsy, imaging follow up 3-12 months or clinical follow up of 2 years and 2) reporting 2 × 2 contingency table data or at least 2 indices of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, negative or positive predictive value) and disease prevalence. | · 40 studies (8 new) included in systematic review of at least one outcome. · Diagnostic accuracy data included from 11 studies (3 new) · Major reasons for exclusion overall were: no outcomes of interest, fewer than 10 patients, abstract only, patient overlap. · Major exclusions from diagnostic accuracy analysis were: suboptimal reference standard and >30% nonadenomas |
| Question 1c) | · Studies on patients with adrenal masses undergoing steroid profiling to determine if the adrenal mass is malignant or not. · Sample size > 10 patients and <20% pheochromocytomas in total cohort · Reference standard: > 50% had histology or imaging-guided follow-up · Reporting 2 × 2 contingency table data or at least 2 indices of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, negative or positive predictive value) and disease prevalence. | · 367 abstracts · 23 potentially relevant articles · 2 studies included in systematic review and meta-analysis · Reasons for exclusion of articles were lack of test accuracy data. |
| What is the diagnostic accuracy of urine and plasma steroid profile? | ||
| Question 2a) Is glucocorticoid excess associated with an | · See69 for details | · 46 (34 new) studies included · See69 for details |
| increased cardiovascular, metabolic and | ||
| fracture risk in patients with adrenal mass(es), in patients with an AI where endocrine work-up for was performed? | ||
| Question 2b) | · See69 for details | · 11 (7 new) studies are included · See69 for details |
| Should surgery or a conservative/medical approach be recommended in patients with adrenal mass(es) and with defined biochemistry and cardiovascular, metabolic and fracture risk potentially indicative of mild glucocorticoid excess? | ||
| Question 3) | · Original studies on adults with suspected nonmetastatic adrenocortical carcinoma · Comparison between minimally invasive versus open surgery · Reporting at least one of the crucial outcomes: perioperative morbidity and mortality; completeness of resection; recurrence-free and overall survival; pain or patient satisfaction · Publications with less than 10 patients per study arm were excluded. | · 690 abstracts (313 new) · 38 potentially relevant articles (25 new) · 3 excluded due to samples size < 10 patients per arm, 1 excluded as review · 14 (5 new) studies included |
| Should minimally invasive (including laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic) or open surgery be used for patients with nonmetastastic adrenal masses suspected to be malignant? |
| Clinical question | Predefined selection criteria and key outcome parametersª | Metrics of the literature search |
|---|---|---|
| Question 4) What is the optimal follow-up in patients with an apparently benign adrenal incidentaloma in order to detect malignant transformation and/or development of overt hormone excess? | · Original studies on patients with an adrenal mass without hormone excess and no clear evidence of malignant adrenal tumor at time of primary diagnosis · Reporting at least one of the following outcomes: malignancy in the adrenal (any kind); development of clinically relevant overt hormone excess (Cushing's syndrome, pheochromocytoma, primary hyperaldosteronism) | · 516 abstracts (383 new) · 59 potentially relevant articles (40 new) · Overlapping with previous search (n = 2), 9 excluded due to overlapping population (n = 3), not relevant to question (n = 3), not available in full-text (n=2), unclear methods (n=1) · 1 systematic review of 14 studies and 28 additional cohort studies (18 new) included |
“The updated systematic review was performed for publication: July 2022 (Q1a, 1c, 2, Q3, 4), and November 2022 (Q1b), respectively.
Diagnostic performance of unenhanced CT in adrenal incidentaloma
Author
Patients
Sensitivity (95% CI)
Specificity (95% CI)
HU > 10
Vilar 2008
52
100.0 (75.3, 100.0)
71.8 (55.1, 85.0)
Hong 2017
958
100.0 (83.2, 100.0)
45.4 (42.2, 48.7)
Marty 2018
252
100.0 (87.2, 100.0)
52.9 (46.1, 59.6)
Bancos 2020
1549
100.0 (97.7, 100.0)
66.7 (64.2, 69.2)
Ebbehoj 2020
660
100.0 (86.3, 100.0)
56.9 (52.9, 60.7)
Schloetelburg 2021
252
100.0 (92.7, 100.0))
54.2 (47.1,61.2)
Summary
3723
100.0 (100.0, 100.0)
57.5 (55.8, 59.1)
HU> 20
Hong 2017
958
100.0 (83.2, 99.5)
67.4 (64.3, 70.4)
Marty 2018
252
96.3 (81.0, 99.9)
65.8 (59.2, 72.0)
Bancos 2020
1554
98.2 (94.7, 99.6)
83.4 (81.3, 85.3)
Ebbehoj 2020
660
88.0 (68.8, 97.5)
81.1 (77.8, 84.1)
Schloetelburg 2021
252
95.9 (86.0, 99.5)
72.9 (66.2, 78.9)
Summary
3676
96.8 (94.0, 98.3)
76.7 (75.3, 78.1)
0
Sensitivity
100
0
Specificity
100
carcinoma-versus other lesions,7º or adenomas versus other lesions71-were not included.
Five studies including 4752 patients who underwent unen- hanced CT imaging reported data on the value of the 4 cm size cutoff to distinguish benign from malignant lesions.1,8,44,72,73 Reported sensitivities ranged from 23%1 to 90%;44 the pooled sensitivity was 77% (95% CI 45%-93%). The pooled specificity was 90% (95% CI 78%-96%) (Figure S1).
Unenhanced CT. Six studies (including five from the new search) reported diagnostic accuracy data for the distinction benign/malignant using HUs for the attenuation value on un- enhanced CT.1,8,44,72-74 CT density >10 HU has a very high sensitivity for detection of adrenal malignancy: 100% in all 6 studies, 95% CI 100%-100%; meaning that adrenal masses with a density of ≤10 HU are virtually never malignant. The pooled specificity was clearly lower (58%, 95% CI 56%-59%), meaning a large number of benign lesions had HU> 10. Five studies provided data for the HU> 20 cutoff and the pooled sensitivity was still high (97%, 95% CI 94%-98%). However, up to 7% of metastases had a HU be- tween 10 and 201,8,44,72 (Figure 1).
Washout-CT. Washout (absolute and relative) in a true inci- dentaloma population was studied only in 3 studies. 72,73,75 However, the study from France was not included as washout data were studied in <50% of patients.73 Notably, while a cut- off of 60% for absolute washout and cutoff of 40% for rela- tive washout are often suggested (including in our previous guidelines),65 evidence for accuracy of these cutoffs in adrenal incidentalomas was very low.76 A recent study demonstrated that with these cutoffs 22% (using absolute washout) and 8% (relative washout) of malignant tumors, respectively, were not correctly identified.72 To detect all malignant tu- mors, a cutoff of 58% for relative percentage washout was suggested leading to a specificity of only 15%. However, this suggested cutoff is in clear need of external validation. There is also some uncertainty about the best timing of the de- layed imaging and no properly designed study comparing dif- ferent time points. However, there are no doubts that at least a 10 minutes delay is required and 15 minutes might be even better.
MRI. No new studies reporting on diagnostic accuracy for MRI were found based on the 2022 search update; it should be noted that the technique is well established. For the con- firmation of benign tumors in true adrenal incidentalomas, 2 of 3 MRI studies including 150 patients reported slightly low- er sensitivity and specificity than CT using of adrenal-liver and adrenal-spleen ratios and loss of signal intensity.77-79 Four of the five studies of MRI investigating patients with history of extra-adrenal malignancy used 1.5 Tesla scanners and re- ported high sensitivity (89%-99%) for measures of adrenal- liver, adrenal-spleen, adrenal-muscle ratios, and loss of signal intensity.53,80-82 Specificity varied (60%-93%) but was high for most MRI measures.7
PET. The performance of PET for adrenal liver ratio and SUVmax measures was assessed in 6 studies (2 included in the previous guideline); 49,51,52,83-85 1 study provided accuracy data for 2 different cutoffs (Figure 2; Tables S4 and S5).49 Different cutoffs were used with adrenal liver ratio and
SUVmax hampering a robust estimation of diagnostic accur- acy measures; therefore we did not perform a formal meta- analysis. For SUVmax, reported sensitivities ranged from 87%83 to 100%.84 For adrenal liver ratio, reported sensitiv- ities were similar and ranged from 85%51 to 100%.84 Reported specificities were lower (Figure 2).
4.1.2 Diagnostic value of adrenal biopsy (Question 1b)
Data on the diagnostic accuracy, complications and nondiag- nostic rates were previously synthesized in a systematic review that included 32 studies.86 In this systematic review, studies had diverse population inclusion criteria, reference standards and biopsy techniques. The pooled nondiagnostic rate (30 studies, 2030 adrenal biopsy procedures) was 8.6% (95% CI 6.1%-11%). The pooled overall complication rate 2.4% (1.5%-3.3%), although this is likely an underrepresentation due to differences in both assessment and reporting of compli- cations as well as the retrospective nature of the studies. Performance of adrenal biopsy in the diagnosis of malignancy was (8 studies, 323 biopsies): sensitivity 87% (78%-93%) and specificity 100% (76%-100%). Performance was lower (and with even wider 95% CIs) for adrenocortical carcinoma: sen- sitivity 70% (42%-88%) and specificity 98% (86%-100%).
Since the systematic review published in 2016, a database search using similar criteria found additional eight studies87-
that reported on nondiagnostic biopsy rates (2032 patients, pooled diagnostic rate of 5.8%), 3 studies87,88,91 reporting on complications (896 patients, mean complication rate of 1.7%), and 3 studies87,88,94 reporting on the diagnostic accur- acy of either CT-guided adrenal biopsy (sensitivity of 88.5%, specificity of 91.5%, positive predictive value of 93.4%, and negative predictive value of 85.5%) or endoscopic ultrasound-guided adrenal fine needle aspiration (sensitivity of 89%-100%, specificity of 97%-100%, positive predictive value of 89%-92%, and negative predictive value of 94%-100%). Overall, diagnostic accuracy, nondiagnostic and complication rates were similar to the systematic review from 2016.
4.1.3 Diagnostic value of steroid profiling (Question 1c)
In recent years, several studies have investigated steroid profil- ing as a tool to discriminate benign from malignant adrenal tu- mors (Tables S6 and S7).8,95-100 However, only 2 studies focused on incidentalomas and reported diagnostic accuracy measures for steroid profiles, to assess malignancy risk. A large prospective study (n = 2017), employed urine steroid metabo- lomics, combining urine steroid profiling by tandem mass spectrometry with machine learning-based steroid data ana- lysis,8 validating a machine learning algorithm previously de- termined in a proof-of-principle study.95 One single retrospective study (n = 577) used plasma steroid profiling by tandem mass spectrometry in a cohort of incidentaloma. 100 As a stand-alone test, the sensitivity was not high enough (about 80%) for both urine and plasma steroid profiling ap- proaches to rule out malignancy with certainty. However, when combined with the imaging criteria (size >4 cm and HU> 20), urine steroid metabolomics diagnosed adrenocort- ical carcinoma (but not other malignancy) with accuracy high- er than imaging alone.8
Figure 2. Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/CT in adrenal incidentaloma. Sensitivity indicates if malignant tumors are correctly identified, whereas as specificity refers to the correct identification of benign lesions. Due to the different cutoffs used in these studies, we abstained from providing pooled values.
Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/CT in adrenal incidentaloma
Author
Cut-off
Patients
Sensitivity (95% CI)
Specificity (95% CI)
SUV max
Tessonnier 2008
3.3
41
91.7 (61.5, 99.8)
72.4 (52.8, 87.3)
Nunes 2010
2.1
23
100.0 (29.2, 100.0)
75.0 (50.9, 91.3)
Nakajo 2015
3
41
90.9 (58.7, 99.8)
66.7 (47.2, 82.7)
Guerin 2017
4.1
87
86.7 (59.5, 98.3)
75.0 (63.4, 84.5)
Adrenal liver ratio
Tessonnier 2008
1.8
41
100.0 (73.5, 100.0)
100.0 (88.1, 100.0)
Nunes 2010
1.6
23
100.0 (29.2, 100.0)
85.0 (62.1, 96.8)
Nakajo 2015
1.08
41
100.0 (71.5, 100.0)
70.0 (50.6, 85.3)
Guerin 2017
1.5
87
86.7 (59.5, 98.3)
86.1 (75.9, 93.1)
He 2021
2.5
117
85.1 (71.7,93.8)
90.0 (80.5, 95.5)
Salgues 2021
1.5
62
90.0 (55.5, 99.7)
92.3 (81.5, 97.9)
0
Sensitivity
100
0
Specificity
100
4.2 Mild autonomous cortisol secretion in adrenal incidentalomas: comorbidities and effect of treatment Forty-six (34 new) studies for clinical question 2a (biochem- ical profile in adrenal incidentaloma), 12,39,40,101-142 and 11 (7 new) studies were assessed for clinical question 2b (thera- peutic approaches for patients with MACS). See69 for details.
4.2.1 Assessment of MACS in relation to clinical outcomes (Question 2a)
In summary, prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors was higher in patients with MACS (Figure 3; Tables S8 and S9). Prevalence of diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia was ~ 15%-40% higher in patients with MACS. No pooled estimate was provided for mortality, however, in all 6 studies reporting on mortality, the RR was numerically increased. Quality of life was not reported as significantly different between patients with MACS and nonfunctioning adrenal incidentalomas.8 A small recent study analyzed an association of MACS and infec- tions and described an increased susceptibility to infections in this patient cohort.143
4.2.2. Surgery vs conservative management in patients with MACS (Question 2b)
Eleven studies were included in the systematic review69 in which surgery was compared to a conservative approach: 2
randomized controlled trials (RCTs)144,145 and 9 observation- al cohort studies (Tables S10 and S11; Figure S2). 140,146-153
The conservative treatments for the group of patients ranged from pharmacotherapeutic interventions for comorbidities to watchful waiting only. The quality of evidence from these cohort studies is low to very low, mainly due to confounding and the lack of a standardized protocol. The 2 RCTs were unblinded.
In summary, none of the included studies reported on the risk of major cardiovascular events or mortality. Improvement in glycemic control in the surgically treated patients was reported in both the RCTs as well as in 7 cohort studies. Similar improve- ments were shown for blood pressure control and dyslipidemia. In the largest RCT to date,145 improvement in blood pressure control was shown in 68% of surgically treated patients, and in only 13.4% in the conservative arm. For improvement in gly- cemic control these numbers were 28% and 3.3%, respectively.
4.3 Surgical approach: open vs minimally invasive adrenalectomy in localized adrenocortical carcinoma (Question 3)
Since incomplete resection is the main risk for future adverse outcomes in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma, we fo- cused our efforts with regards to surgical management of pa- tient’s presenting with adrenal incidentaloma undergoing adrenal surgery for suspected adrenocortical carcinoma
Mortality and morbidity1 in patients with mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS2)
| Outcome | Cut-off | Number of studies | Number of patients | Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All-cause mortality | >1.8ug/dL | 4 | 5921 | 1.54 (1.27, 1.81) | |
| .5 1 2 4 | |||||
| Outcome | Cut-off | Number of studies | Number of patients | Relative Risk (95% CI) | |
| Diabetes | >1.8µg/dL | 14 | 9375 | 1.44 (1.23, 1.69) | |
| Hypertension | >1.8μg/dL | 18 | 10031 | 1.24 (1.16, 1.32) | |
| Dyslipidemia | >1.8µg/dL | 12 | 7769 | 1.23 (1.13, 1.34) | |
| Vertebral fractures3,4 | >1.8µg/dL | 3 | 637 | 1.08 (0.68, 1.71) | |
| .5 1 2 4 | |||||
Figure 3. Morbidity in patients with mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS). 1This is a summary figure of our systematic review.69 2MACS was defined by a serum cortisol after 1 mg dexamethasone >1.8 ug/dL and the results were compared to patients with nonfunctioning incidentaloma. 3For vertebral fractures an association was found in few studies when a cutoff of 3 ug/dL is used. 4Including microfractures.
(Tables S12 and S13). Fourteen cohort studies on the surgical treatment of patients with nonmetastatic adrenocortical car- cinoma were included.154-167 Four studies reported on the pa- tients in whom complete resection of the tumor was achieved. 156,158,162,166
The quality of evidence from these observational studies is very low, mainly because patient groups were not comparable at baseline with regard to important prognostic characteris- tics, such as tumor stage or size. Tumor stage was, on average, lower in patients with minimally invasive surgery as compared to open surgery. In few studies, 154,161,166 treatment effects were adjusted for differences in tumor stage or other con- founders. Mostly, however, only uncorrected estimates of recurrence-free and overall survival were reported. Moreover, most studies had imprecise effect estimates.
Outcome measures
Perioperative mortality and morbidity. One study reported on perioperative mortality.154 In this study, none of the 152 patients died perioperatively. Four studies reported on intrao- perative or postoperative complications.157,158,161,167 Major postoperative complications (Clavien-classification score 3-5) occurred more often in open surgeries compared to min- imally invasive surgeries (RR 1.7, 95% CI 0.5-6.2), but these estimates are imprecise.
Completeness of resection. In 8 studies the completeness of resection was reported.154,155,157,159,161,163,164,166 The pooled estimate of 6 studies (following the exclusion of studies with overlapping study cohorts) indicated no clear difference in the occurrence of complete resection between laparoscopic and open surgical approaches (RR 0.94 [95% CI 0.86-1.03]; Figure S3).154,155,157,159,161,164 The results of
these studies were inconsistent, and residual confounding is likely present, leading to much uncertainty regarding this conclusion.
Recurrence-free and overall survival. Eleven studies reported on recurrence after surgery but differed in the presentation of these data. These studies also provided data on overall or disease-specific survival.154-158,160-163,165,167 There is no com- pelling evidence that one of the approaches (minimally inva- sive or open adrenalectomy) is superior with regard to time to recurrence and/or survival in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma, provided that rupture of tumor capsule is ex- cluded. However, the studies have relevant limitations, incon- sistencies and imprecision precluding reliance on this conclusion.
Pain/patient satisfaction. None of the studies reported on pain or patient satisfaction.
Quality of life. None of the studies reported on mental health or quality of life.
4.4 Natural course of apparently benign adrenal incidentaloma (risk of malignancy or development of hormone excess) (Question 4)
Quantifying the risk of development of malignancy and overt hormone excess in a patient diagnosed with an apparently be- nign and nonfunctioning adrenal incidentaloma will dictate the intensity of follow up needed (Tables S14 and S15; Figure S4). We performed a systematic review of cohort stud- ies assessing the emergence of features of malignancy or hor- mone excess during follow-up of adrenal incidentalomas initially classified as being nonfunctioning and benign.
In the 2016 version of this guideline, a combination of 14 studies included in a systematic review,168 and 10 additional cohort studies were assessed.27,132-134,146,169-177 Now, 18 additional cohort studies were included, resulting in a total of 1 systematic review and 28 cohort stud- jes. 40,44,118,136,138,139,177-187
The quality of evidence from these studies was judged mod- erate or low. Selection criteria were often not reported, the duration of follow-up was heterogeneous across studies (me- dians ranging from 19 months to 7 years) the completeness of follow-up was difficult to assess, and multiple studies had high loss to follow-up. Information on the protocol of bio- chemical or radiological reevaluation was not always pro- vided or standardized. In addition, criteria for hormonal excess were heterogeneous across studies.
Outcome measures
Malignancy. In total, 10 studies (1 systematic review and 9 cohort studies) reported on the development of adrenal malig- nancy during follow-up. 132,168,169,172,173,176,180-182,188 The estimated pooled risk for developing malignancy extracted from the systematic review was 0.2% (95% CI 0.0-0.4).168 Notably, in 2 cohort studies included in the systematic review, 2 cases of malignancy were found: adrenal non-Hodgkin lymphoma and renal cancer metastasis.28,189 However, it is unclear whether these patients had features of benign inciden- taloma at the time of initial imaging. In the 9 cohort studies in- cluded, no case of malignancy or malignant transformation was reported in 751 patients (follow-up range 1.6-5.8 years). 132,169,172,173,176,180-182,188
Development of clinically overt hormone excess. Twenty-two cohort studies reported on results of consecutive dexamethasone tests. 44,118,131,136,138,139,169,178,179,182-185,190 In the individual studies, the proportion of patients developing MACS varied from 0.0% to 31.4%, the latter clearly being an outlier. As shown in Figure S4, the pooled pro- portions for development of MACS were 5.4% (95% CI 3.1%-8.1%).
The risk of developing overt Cushing’s syndrome in patients without clinical signs of Cushing’s syndrome at the time of ini- tial assessment was reported by 9 studies (1 systematic review and 8 cohort studies). 40,44,168,178,183,186,190 In total, the devel- opment of overt Cushing’s syndrome in the individual studies ranged from 0.0% (reported in 7 cohort studies) to 0.65% (re- ported in 1 study,190 which is similar to the risk reported in the previous systematic review of developing clinically overt Cushing’s syndrome (with a pooled estimate of 0.3%).168
The development of hyperaldosteronism during follow-up was reported by 10 studies. 44,118,170,172,176,183,188,190,191 The risk of developing an aldosterone-producing adenoma in these studies ranged from 0.0%-1.64%, with solely 2 stud- ies reporting one single case each. 118,188
The development of a pheochromocytoma during follow- up was reported by 13 studies (1 systematic review, 12 cohort studies). 44,118,132,168-170,172,176,183,185,188,190 As reported by the individual studies, the risk of developing a secretory pheo- chromocytoma ranged from 0.0% (reported by 9 studies) to 2.1% (with 3 studies reporting cases,118,169,176 while the pooled risk of developing a pheochromocytoma was 0.2% based on the systematic review.168 Unfortunately, it is not
clear in these studies if the baseline imaging and biochemical assessment was complete and adequate.
5. Recommendations, rationale for the recommendations
5.1. General remarks
The main part of this guideline addresses the management of patients who fulfill the definition of adrenal incidentaloma (Section 2.1). In addition, we discuss specific situations separ- ately: bilateral adrenal masses (Section 5.6.1), patients who are young or elderly and frail (Section 5.6.2), and adrenal masses detected during evaluation for extra-adrenal malig- nancy (Section 5.6.3).
· R.1.1 We recommend that patients with adrenal inciden- talomas are discussed in a multidisciplinary expert team meeting, if at least one of the following criteria is met:
· Imaging is not consistent with a benign lesion (see Section 5.2).
· There is evidence of hormone excess (including MACS in patients with clinically relevant comorbidities po- tentially attributable to cortisol) (see Section 5.3).
· Adrenal surgery is considered (see Section 5.4).
· Evidence of significant tumor growth during follow-up imaging (see Section 5.5).
The core multidisciplinary team should consist of an endo- crinologist, a radiologist, and a surgeon, all with significant experience in the management of adrenal tumors.
Reasoning
We believe that the ideal would be for all patients with ad- renal incidentalomas to be managed by an expert multidiscip- linary team. However, in many health care settings this is an unrealistic scenario, considering the high number of inciden- tally discovered masses. Although there is still no compelling evidence available, there is some evidence that multidisciplin- ary care improves outcomes in patients with adrenal tu- mors.192-195 Thus, we aimed at identifying subgroups of patients who would be most likely to benefit from multidiscip- linary team discussion and that these discussions occur quickly for patients that meet the above criteria. For this purpose, the center should establish standard operating procedures for the diagnostic and therapeutic work-up, because these standards will help to offer improved and standardized care to all patients. Our suggested pathway is summarized in Figure 4. The above- mentioned multidisciplinary team should ideally include or at least have access to an endocrine pathologist, an oncologist, and an anesthetist, all experienced in adrenal tumors. Although it is beyond the scope of this guideline, the use of a standardized pathology report is highly recommended.191
5.2. Assessment of the risk of malignancy
· R.2.1 We recommend aiming to establish with the highest possible certainty if an adrenal mass is benign or malig- nant at the time of initial detection.
Reasoning
It is critical to know if an adrenal mass is malignant or be- nign as clinical management is dependent on establishing this fact, regardless of whether the mass is functioning or not.
Adrenal incidentaloma1,2
Assess in parallel
Potentially malignant?
Functionally active?
· see Table 4
· Clinical assessment
· Non-contrast CT
· 1mg dexamethasone test
· If HU > 10 : see Figure 5
· Plasma or urinary metanephrines3
· Adlosterone/renin ratio4
· Sex-hormones and steriod percursors5
Aim at the establishment of a definitive diagnosis
Discuss in multidisciplinary team
Non-functioning, benign lesion (e.g. adenoma, (myelo-)lipoma)
Indeterminate mass
Benign adrenal mass with MACS
Clinically relevant hormone excess or tumor with malignant features
No further investigation
See Figure 5
Figure 6
Surgery, details see Figure 7
Malignant lesions may need urgent surgical intervention and oth- er therapies, and delay may cause harm. Therefore, it is crucial that all images of patients with adrenal incidentaloma a reviewed by an experienced radiologist; also focusing on the contralateral adrenal, which is not rarely also hyperplastic or nodular.
. R.2.2 We recommend that all adrenal incidentalomas undergo an imaging procedure to determine if the mass is homogeneous and lipid-rich and therefore benign (+000). For this purpose, we recommend the use of
noncontrast CT as the first imaging modality if not yet performed (0000).
. R.2.3 We recommend that if the noncontrast CT is con- sistent with a benign adrenal mass (homogenous appear- ance and HUs ≤10) no further imaging is required (+000) (Figure 5).
Reasoning
In patients with no known extra-adrenal malignancy, ad- renal incidentalomas are likely to be benign. The noncontrast
Unenhanced CT
Imaging work-up in patients with adrenal incidentaloma
Diagnostics
Any size and homogenous and HU ≤ 10
Homogenous and HU 11-20 and tumor < 4cm
Homogenous HU 11-20 and tumor ≥ 4cm or Homogenous HU > 20 and tumor < 4cm or Heterogeneous tumors < 4cm
Homogenous HU > 20 and tumor > 4cm or Heterogeneous and tumor > 4cm
Primary decision
No further imaging required
Additional imaging1
Discuss in MDT meeting and consider proceeding swiftly to additional imaging1,2
Discuss in MDT meeting and consider proceeding swiftly to surgery2,3
(or interval imaging in 12 months)
(or immediate surgery)
(or further imaging (esp. FDG-PET/CT))
Follow-up
Uncharacterized (continuing indeterminate mass):
In case of no surgery:
Interval imaging in 6-12 months (non contract CT/MRI)
Interval imaging in 6-12 months (non contrast CT/MRI)
CT HU value is reflective of tissue density. Benign lesions in- cluding lipid-rich adenoma, myelolipoma, and fluid-filled homogenous cysts have low CT density ≤ 10 HU. Based on our systematic reviews and meta-analyses in 201676 and in 2022 (see Section 4.1), in 3723 patients presenting without known malignancy a noncontrast CT HU of ≤10 was only found in benign disease. 1,8,44,50,71-74
Thus, with more supportive evidence since the previous guidelines, the panel felt confident about the negative predict- ive value of noncontrast CT to recommend that additional
imaging was not necessary when unequivocal benign charac- teristics were found, especially as additional imaging (Table 4) may risk false positive results and subsequent psy- chological and financial burden for patients and the health sys- tem. Due to better evidence derived from observations in 1197 patients with tumors ≥4 cm,8,10 we have removed the size cut- off of 4 cm that we introduced, arbitrarily, in 2016.
Similar to CT, the results of MRI with chemical shift im- aging are based on the lipid content of masses.196,197 Unlike CT (and FDG-PET), MRI has the advantage of avoiding
| Method | Criteria favoring a benign mass | Strength of evidenceb |
|---|---|---|
| Noncontrast CT | ≤ 10 HUC | |
| FDG-PET/CT | Absence of FDG uptake or uptake less than the liverd | |
| MRI-chemical shift | Loss of signal intensity on out-phase imaging consistent with lipid-rich adenoma | |
| CT with delayed contrast media washoute | Relative washout > 58%f |
“These criteria apply only for masses with homogenous appearance, or masses that have other clear characteristics consistent with benign disease, eg, myelolipoma. A homogeneous mass is defined as a lesion with uniform density or signal intensity throughout. The measurements/region of interest (ROI) should include at least 75% of a lesion without contamination by tissues outside the adrenal lesion. Nonhomogeneous lesions should not be subjected to MRI or washout CT for further characterization.
bThe strength of recommendation based on our systematic review on this topic (Section 4.1.1) and our personal experience.
“The majority of adrenal masses with HU 11-20 are also benign, especially in patients without history of extra-adrenal malignancy (see Section 4.1.1 and Reasoning R.2.4 for details).
dCertain metastasis (eg, from kidney cancer or low grade lymphoma) may be FDG negative.
“There is no clear evidence about the best time interval. However,
experienced adrenal radiologists prefer 15 min over 10 min.
This cutoff based on a single study with only 253 adrenal tumors72 and has to be judged with caution and several older studies suggest a cutoff of 40%. Abbreviation: HU, Hounsfield unit.
ionizing radiation and its attendant risks to the patient. However, the quantitative assessment of loss in signal inten- sity is not well standardized between different studies and, therefore, the evidence base for the performance of MRI in the diagnosis of malignancy is insufficient to make strong rec- ommendations (see Section 4.1). Moreover, the interpretation of the images might be more dependent on the experience of the radiologist than that for quantitative CT assessment. In addition, the meta-analysis was not able to determine the diag- nostic value of MRI, especially compared to CT, due to the low number and quality of eligible studies. In the last 6 years, no study on MRI fulfilling our selection criteria has been pub- lished. One very recent study was published at the beginning of 2023 and suggests utility of MRI even in adrenal lesions with heterogeneous microscopic fat (n =283).198 However, MRI with chemical shift should still be first choice only where a CT is less desirable (eg, pregnancy, children). Nevertheless, if an MRI with chemical shift is already performed and the re- sults are unambiguous, a multidisciplinary expert team might judge this as sufficient for an individual patient.
· R.2.4 If CT demonstrates a homogeneous adrenal mass with unenhanced HU between 11 and 20 and a tumor size <4 cm, and the results of the hormonal work-up do not indicate significant hormone excess, we suggest an imme- diate additional imaging (Table 4) to avoid any follow-up imaging (ĐOOO) (Figure 5). Alternatively, interval im- aging in 12 months by noncontrast CT (or MRI) could be performed.
. R.2.5 If the adrenal mass is ≥ 4 cm and heterogeneous or has unenhanced HU > 20, there is a relevant risk that this lesion is malignant. Therefore, we suggest discussing such
cases in a multidisciplinary team meeting. In most cases, im- mediate surgery will be the management of choice, but in some patients, additional imaging might be an option (ĐOOO). Prior to surgery, we suggest completely staging the patient (including at least thoracic CT and/or FDG-PET/CT (@OOO)). If surgery is not performed, fol- low up imaging in 6-12 months is recommended (֏000).
· R.2.6 In adrenal masses that do not fall in one of the cat- egories above (eg, tumor size ≥ 4 cm with unenhanced HU 11-20; or tumor size < 4 cm with unenhanced HU >20; or tumor size < 4 cm with heterogeneous appear- ance), we suggest an individualized approach with discus- sion in a multidisciplinary team meeting (ĐOOO). The likelihood of a malignant tumor is still low. Therefore, in most cases, immediate additional imaging according to the center expertise and availability is the preferred op- tion. If the tumor is still judged as indeterminate mass and surgery is not performed, we recommend interval imaging in 6-12 months (noncontrast CT/MRI) (+000).
Reasoning
The panel decided to divide the group of tumors with HU > 10 into 3 groups (Figure 5). For this purpose, we used based on recent studies8,10,70,75 the appearance of the mass, tumor size, and HU as cutoffs. As described in section 4.1, there is increas- ing evidence that, especially in patients without history of extra-adrenal malignancy, > 90% of the homogeneous ad- renal tumors with unenhanced HU between 11 and 20 are be- nign.1,8,44,72,73 However, there are some metastases and very few adrenocortical carcinoma with HU in this range.8,72 Thus, in adrenal masses < 4 cm and HU between 11 and 20 (without hormonal activity), the first choice is one additional imaging method (depending on the local experience and pref- erence FDG-PET/CT, MRI with chemical shift or washout-CT). If these imaging results are suggestive of a be- nign lesion, no further imaging is required. Our second choice would be a follow-up imaging to monitoring just the size of the lesion by noncontrast CT (or MRI). For this purpose imaging focusing just on the adrenal seems reasonable. Due to the low likelihood of malignancy, a 12-month interval would seem to be reasonable for the majority of patients.
In contrast, if the tumor size is ≥4 cm and has unenhanced HU> 20 or a heterogeneous appearance, the risk of malig- nancy is clearly increased. In tumors that fulfill both categor- ies, the likelihood of a malignant lesion even in a “true” incidentaloma cohort could be as high as 50%.8 Therefore, a multidisciplinary team meeting should discuss this case in de- tail. In most cases, the option of surgery should be offered to the patient. Prior to surgery, a complete tumor staging should be performed, because the detection of other potentially ma- lignant lesions will most likely modify clinical management. In this context, a thoracic CT is essential, because small lung metastases are relatively frequent in adrenocortical carcin- oma. Therefore, our recommendation to use FDG-PET/CT alone in this case applies only if CT component of the study is of routine diagnostic quality.
However, there are some tumors that do not fall the categor- ies above. Based on our own experience and the available lit- erature, 8,10,70,75 we judge the risk of malignancy in this subgroup still rather small, but higher as in tumors <4 cm and HU 10-20. Therefore, instead of immediate surgery, add- itional imaging seemed most appropriate. Although, the evi- dence of targeted evaluation for “second or third-line”
imaging in patients with indeterminate adrenal mass is still limited (see Section 4.1), most panelists judged the value of FDG-PET/CT higher than that of MRI or CT with delayed washout. FDG-PET/CT has the advantage that the risk of false negative results (namely missing a malignant adrenal tumor) is quite low, 49-52,83-85,199-202 but it is clearly not zero203 (Table 4). This procedure is, however, more expensive, not al- ways easily available, and has the disadvantage that several be- nign adrenal tumors (eg, functional adenomas) may be FDG-positive lesions.204,205 The advantages and limitations of MRI with chemical shift are already discussed at R.2.3. Furthermore, there might be a publication bias, because ad- renal MRI with chemical shift is judged as quite established and new studies on this topic might be seen as less attractive. Therefore, the multidisciplinary team should decide based on local expertise and availability which additional method is used. For washout CT, 1 recent study provided some evidence that a relative percentage washout of >58% might be a more appropriate cutoff.72 However, this cutoff requires to be con- firmed by other studies. If the additional imaging is suggestive of a malignant lesion, then surgery is advised. If the mass is still uncharacterized, but no surgery is performed, a follow-up im- aging in 6-12 months is advised.
A promising alternative, where available, with high specifi- city for adrenocortical carcinoma is urine steroid metabolo- mics, combining urine steroid profiling by tandem mass spectrometry with machine learning-based steroid data ana- lysis. In a prospective study with more than 2000 patients with adrenal incidentaloma, this approach had positive pre- dictive value of 76.4% and a negative predictive value of 99.7%.8
In the case of second-line imaging or urine steroid metabo- lomics suggesting benign disease, or for any other reason sur- gery was not performed, follow-up imaging in 6-12 months depending on the individually perceived risk of malignancy is the preferred strategy (except for tumors <4 cm and HU 11-20 that do not need such interval imaging). Since there are very few adrenocortical carcinomas that grow very slowly, few panelists even preferred imaging both after 6 and 12 months.
There are no published or commonly agreed size or volume cutoffs that may be used that indicate growth suggestive of malignancy; the expert panel agreed in line with RECIST 1.1 criteria, an increase of >20% of the largest tumor diameter to- gether with at least 5 mm increase in this diameter should be considered as suspicious.
However, if there is no change in size, no further imaging is needed.
. R.2.7 We recommend against the use of an adrenal biopsy in the diagnostic work-up of patients with adrenal masses unless there is a history of extra-adrenal malignancy (see R.6.3.5).
Reasoning
Adrenal biopsy has a limited role in evaluation of adrenal masses-mainly in diagnosis of extra-adrenal malignancy, lymphoma, sarcoma, infiltrative or infectious process. 11,206 Even in such situations, adrenal biopsy should be performed only after exclusion of a pheochromocytoma and by physi- cians experienced in this procedure and when it affects man- agement decisions.86,91,207 We particularly recommend against an adrenal biopsy if an adrenal mass is likely to be
an adrenocortical carcinoma, because a biopsy of such a tu- mor runs the risk of tumor dissemination, precluding an R0 re- section. It has been reported to lead to worse overall survival in patients with stages 1 and 2 adrenocortical carcinoma.208 The only exceptions might be if a formal confirmation of the diagnosis is needed in an inoperable tumor to inform onco- logical management or as part of a clinical trial.
· R.2.8 We suggest measurement of sex steroids and pre- cursors of steroidogenesis (ideally using multisteroid pro- filing by tandem mass spectrometry) in patients in whom by imaging or clinical features an adrenocortical carcin- oma is suspected (+000).
Reasoning
Adrenocortical carcinoma is associated in more than half of cases with elevated sex hormones and/or steroid precur- sors.209-212 The panel does not recommend measurement of these hormones in patients with adrenal incidentalomas on a routine basis, but in cases with indeterminate adrenal mass by imaging or clinical signs for androgen or estrogen excess (eg, rapid virilization in women or rapidly developing gyneco- mastia in men), significantly increased sex hormones or pre- cursors might clearly point toward adrenocortical carcinoma. Thus, measurement of serum DHEA-S, andro- stenedione, 17-hydroxyprogesterone, 11-deoxycortisol, as well as testosterone in women and estradiol in men and post- menopausal women can give clear indication of the adreno- cortical nature of the adrenal mass. However, the panel acknowledges that the published evidence for this suggestion is very low.95,210 Analysis of a comprehensive serum or urin- ary steroid profiles measured by GC-MS or LC-MS was found useful to discriminate benign from malignant adrenocortical tumors.95-99,213 By combining the results of a machine learn- ing algorithm processing urine steroid multi-profiling data with CT features (tumor size and HU on unenhanced CT), a prospective study on this topic with more than 2000 patients demonstrated that it is possible to reduce significantly the number of surgeries of indeterminate tumors wrongly sus- pected to be adrenocortical carcinoma.8 Therefore, the evi- dence is strongest for this method. However, urine steroid metabolomics is not yet widely available and is only validated and standardized in very few laboratories. Furthermore, it is not able to identify nonadrenocortical malignant adrenal masses.
5.3. Assessment for hormone excess
. R.3.1 We recommend that every patient with an adrenal incidentaloma should undergo careful assessment includ- ing clinical examination for symptoms and signs of ad- renal hormone excess.
Reasoning
All patients should undergo a careful evaluation with de- tailed history and physical examination to detect clues of overt hormone excess, as certain features are nonspecific and may be missed. For the clinical assessment and subsequent diagnostic procedures for Cushing’s syndrome, primary aldosteronism, and pheochromocytoma, we refer to other guidelines. 61-63
Rapid onset and progression of hirsutism or virilization is a clinical indicator for an androgen-producing tumor and
should be addressed by measuring serum testosterone and an- drogen precursors DHEA(S) and androstenedione, whereas recent onset of gynecomastia should trigger measurement of serum 17-beta-estradiol211,212,214,215 (see also R.2.8).
· R.3.2 We recommend that patients with adrenal inciden- talomas undergo a 1-mg overnight dexamethasone sup- pression test to exclude autonomous cortisol secretion (+00O). In frail patients with limited life expectancy, this test may not be warranted.
. R.3.3 We recommend interpretation of the results of the 1-mg overnight dexamethasone test as a continuous ra- ther than categorical (yes/no) variable (֏000). However, we recommend using serum cortisol levels post dexamethasone ≤50 nmol/L (≤1.8 µg/dL) as a diag- nostic criterion for the exclusion of autonomous cortisol secretion (9000).
. R.3.4 We recommend that in patients without signs and symptoms of overt Cushing’s syndrome a postdexame- thasone serum cortisol concentration above 50 nmol/L (>1.8 µg/dL) should be considered as MACS without any further stratification based on the degree of cortisol nonsuppressibility (+@OO). In these patients, we recom- mend that ACTH-independency should be confirmed. Conditions that alter the results of the 1 mg DST should considered for the interpretation of the results of the test. A repeat DST to confirm cortisol secretory autonomy is recommended. Additional biochemical tests to assess the degree of cortisol secretion might be useful. However, for clinical management, the presence of co- morbidities potentially attributable to cortisol excess (Table 5), age, and the general condition of the patient are major factors for clinical decision-making (Figure 6).
Reasoning
A variety of diagnostic algorithms have been used to exclude cortisol excess or to define the formerly so-called “subclinical hypercortisolism,” but in the literature there are no head-to-head comparisons between tests to assess their diag- nostic performance (see Section 4.2.1); also formal compari- sons between algorithms and relevant clinical outcomes are lacking. In the 2016 ESE-ENSAT guidelines, however, the panel recommended the use of the 1-mg overnight dexa- methasone test based on pathophysiological reasoning, simplicity, and the fact that the test was incorporated in the diagnostic algorithms of most studies. Following the release of the ESE-ENSAT guidelines, studies have increas- ingly relied on the results of a 1-mg DST to categorize patients 12,39,40,113,114,116,117,119,120,123,125,137,138,141
The panel believes that cortisol autonomy reflects a bio- logical continuum with no clear separation between nonfunc- tioning adenomas and functioning adenomas associated with some degree of cortisol excess. However, considering current evidence, a value of ≤50 nmol/L (≤ 1.8 µg/dL) may be re- garded as physiologic, excluding cortisol excess. Thus, a cutoff value of 50 nmol/L for post-DST cortisol has been consistently used to differentiate cortisol autonomy from normal secretion. In some studies, patients with nonsuppressed cortisol after 1 mg dexamethasone have been further stratified in 2 categor- ies following the previous recommendations of the ESE-ENSAT guidelines, that is, patients with post-DST corti- sol levels between 50 and 138 nmol/L (1.9-4.9 µg/dL) and
| Prevalence (%) in patients with ACSb | Prevalence (%) in patients with nonfunctioning incidentalomas | Relative riskb | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type 2 diabetes mellitus | 13-54 | 14-39 | 0.94-3.14 |
| Hypertension | 46-88 | 30-68 | 0.69-1.69 |
| Dyslipidemia | 26-67 | 25-49 | 0.71-1.92 |
ªMACS was defined by a serum cortisol after 1 mg dexamethasone > 50 nmol/L (> 1.8 µg/dL).
bReported ranges.
Abbreviation: MACS, mild autonomous cortisol secretion.
patients with levels of 138 nmol/L, or higher.12,39,40,141 Any cutoff value of post-DST cortisol has an overall poor accuracy to predict prevalent comorbidities;69,110 however, different studies showed a relationship between progressively increased post-DST cortisol levels and higher rate of comorbidities al- though the pattern is not linear.12,39,40,123 One large cohort study found that mortality was significantly increased only when post-DST cortisol values were ≥83 nmol/L (3 µg/dL),39 a finding that warrants replication in future studies. Finally, the panel judged that there is convincing evidence that the cut- off at >50 nmol/L (>1.8 ug/dL) differentiates patients at in- creased risk of comorbidities and death, while there is no clear evidence to further differentiate patients on the degree of cortisol nonsuppressibility. Therefore, the panel argues that the previous stratification between “possible autonomous cortisol secretion,” when serum cortisol post dexamethasone is between 51 and 138 nmol/L, and “autonomous cortisol secretion,” when serum cortisol is higher than 138 nmol/L, should be abandoned and finally suggested the term “MACS.” The patients who suppress cortisol below 50 nmol/L do not need any further evaluation or follow-up by an endocrinologist. In patients with MACS, a careful second clinical evaluation might be necessary to search for signs of overt Cushing’s that may have been overlooked at first examination, and to confirm ACTH independency by demonstrating suppressed or at least low-normal morning plasma ACTH (Figure 6). Some panelists felt that the measurement of serum DHEA-S or age- and sex- adjusted DHEAS ratios is helpful to identify patients with relevant MACS, especially in patients at risk of false positive of the 1 mg DST, because DHEA-S is decreased when the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis is chronically sup- pressed.216-218 However, age-adjusted DHEA-S reference values are not well established. Recently, a new approach to diagnose ACTH independency was suggested by measur- ing ACTH after a 1 mg DST,219 but these results have to be confirmed.
Further, the assessment of the presence of comorbidities po- tentially attributable to cortisol (Table 5) becomes of utmost importance to guide management. However, we are well aware that the likelihood of comorbidities increases with age. Furthermore, with increasing age cortisol after 1 mg DST is also increasing,12 and there is evidence that in patients > 65 years the clinical relevance of MACS is decreasing.40 Thus, this aspect has to be considered individually. In particu- larly, in frail patients the documentation of MACS is very
Apparently benign adrenal incidentaloma
1 mg Dexamethasone Suppression Test (DST)
Serum cortisol ≤ 50 nmol/L
Serum cortisol ≥ 50 nmol/L1
No evidence of autonomous cortisol secretion
Overt Cushing syndrome
Yes
Overt features of Cushing syndrome?
Mild autonomous cortisol secretion (MACS)
Comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol?2
Yes
No
Consider ACTH- dependent Cushing syndrome4
No
MACS confirmed? ACTH independency?3
Yes
No treatment and no follow-up
Consider specific treatment5
Monitor for development of comorbidities potentially attributed to cortisol6
likely irrelevant and has no clinical consequences. Thus, the DST should be omitted in this patient group unless overt Cushing’s syndrome is suspected.
Patients without detectable comorbidities should not under- go a specific treatment (ie, surgery) but require follow-up for the development of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol (see R.5.4), while a subset of patients with relevant co- morbidities should be considered for specific treatment (see also R.3.8; Figure 6).
Some panel members (but not all) preferred additional bio- chemical tests to confirm cortisol secretory autonomy and as- sess the degree of cortisol secretion. However, we acknowledge that the use of several tests may be associated with an increased likelihood of at least one being a false positive result. As the cortisol after 1 mg dexamethasone might not cor- relate with the degree of cortisol secretion, some panelists per- form the additional measurement of 24-hour urinary free cortisol and/or late-night salivary cortisol. However, depending on the assay, these results are within the normal range in most patients without overt Cushing’s syndrome. Thus, pathological results might indeed point toward a more advanced phenotype. Similarly, few panelists use a higher dose of dexamethasone (eg, 3 mg, 2 × 2 mg, or 8 mg) following the concept that cortisol se- cretion in patients with MACS is independent of ACTH. However, the published literature is too limited and controver- sial to make a clear statement on these tests. 108,124,220
One major problem with this categorical definition be- tween “healthy” and “potentially ill” (MACS) derives from less than ideal sensitivity and specificity of the DST to diagnose or exclude MACS. We are well aware that every laboratory should actually validate the given cutoff locally. However, this cumbersome procedure may be unrealistic for many centers, but all clinicians should be aware of this limi- tation and should base their clinical decision on management not only on this single parameter. Due to the fact that there will be false-positive results on dexamethasone testing, the test should be repeated in all patients with MACS in whom sur- gery is considered as a therapeutic option. Measurement of se- rum dexamethasone alongside serum cortisol in the 1-mg DST may help excluding false positive DST results due to poor ab- sorption or increased dexamethasone metabolism.221-224 However, this method is not yet widely available.
· R.3.5 We recommend against considering patients with MACS (per definition without specific clinical signs of Cushing’s syndrome) as being at high risk for develop- ment of overt Cushing’s syndrome (+000).
Reasoning
Studies reporting on follow-up of patients with adrenal inci- dentalomas have uniformly found a very low percentage (<1%) of patients with MACS progressing to overt Cushing’s syn- drome 19,25-28,30-32,40,168,225 (see also Section 4.4).
· R.3.6 We recommend screening patients with adrenal in- cidentaloma and MACS for hypertension and type 2 dia- betes mellitus (+@OO) and suggest offering appropriate treatment of these conditions.
Reasoning
There is an increasing body of evidence on an association between MACS and either hypertension
or hyperglycemia
12,29,39,40,103,108,110,112-114,117,118,120,123,124,
126,138,140,141,226-232 (see also section 4.2.1 and69). The associ- ation with dyslipidemia is less solid, although biologically plausible. 12,110,117,118,121,123 Therefore, the panel is clearly in favor of screening for these conditions, which are well known independent cardiovascular risk factors, and which may be driven by cortisol excess, and to treat them according to current guidelines. For this screening the following meas- ures seems reasonable: blood pressure (ideally as ambulatory measurement), HbA1c, LDL and HDL cholesterol, triglycer- ides, and body weight. There is also evidence that MACS is as- sociated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events and excess mortality. 39,40,130,131,139,142
· R.3.7 We suggest screening patients with adrenal inciden- taloma and MACS for vertebral fractures (9000) and to consider appropriate treatment of these conditions (Đ000).
Reasoning
Some 101-104,133,146,233 but not all studies109,119,137 found an increased incidence of asymptomatic vertebral fractures. However, accurate assessment of (micro-) fractures on X rays is not part of clinical practice everywhere. Therefore, at least overt fractures should be identified at the time of diagno- sis. This can be done by asking patients about a history of non- traumatic fracture and, possibly, by reevaluating the available images (CT scan) or by plain X-ray.
Assessment of bone mineral density by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry has been shown to be a suboptimal tool to diagnose glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis since gluco- corticoid excess has a greater impact on bone microarchitec- tural texture than on areal bone mineral density. 234,235 Furthermore, conflicting results on bone mineral density in patients with MACS have been found. Few studies using noninvasive radiological evaluation of bone microarchitec- ture such as trabecular bone scan found qualitative bone de- terioration in MACS.104,234,236 However, the number of these studies is small requiring further confirmation (see also section 6) and radiological evaluation of bone micro- architecture is not widely available. We therefore suggest to consider BMD especially in patients with MACS with clinical suspicion of osteoporosis or in the presence of asso- ciated risk factors for osteoporosis.
· R.3.8 We recommend discussing the option of surgery with the patient who has MACS in addition to relevant comorbidities and a unilateral adrenal mass (+000). Age, sex, general health, degree and persistence of non- suppressible cortisol after dexamethasone, severity of co- morbidities and patient’s preference should be taken into account (@OOO). In all cases, the proposal to perform surgery should be established within an expert multidis- ciplinary group.
Reasoning
Due to the limitations of current literature, especially the lack of high-quality randomized trials, the panel could not define the exact indications for surgery for patients with MACS. The panel appreciated that there is some evidence of improvement of hypertension and hyperglycemia with surgery, but this is largely based on low quality data. 146-
148,150-152 In addition, there are 2 small randomized trials that point in this direction. 144,145 However, the evaluation and treatment of comorbidities in operated and nonoperated patients after randomization were not standardized, pre- venting an accurate assessment of the benefits of surgery. Furthermore, no data are available on more clinically rele- vant endpoints (eg, mortality or major cardiovascular events). Thus, the decision to undertake surgery should be individualized considering factors that are linked to out- come, such as patient’s age, degree and persistence of corti- sol autonomy on at least 2 separate evaluations, duration and evolution of comorbidities and their degree of control, and presence and extent of end organ damage. Because it is not possible to predict accurately the results of surgical inter- vention on the clinical phenotype of an individual patient, there was no complete agreement within the panel regarding the optimal management of these patients. Overall, the group agreed that there may be an indication for surgery in a patient with a unilateral adrenal mass, a post dexametha- sone cortisol >50 nmol/L (>1.8 µg/dL) and the presence of at least one of the following features in the comorbidities po- tentially attributable to cortisol: (1) progressive; (2) difficult to treat; (3) associated with inappropriate end organ damage for age; (4) unusual for age or discrepant from family his- tory; or (5) multiple comorbidities. Given the lack of specific evidence, the panel felt that the presence of (some of) these features may suggest that normalization of cortisol auton- omy has a greater likelihood to benefit patients who are op- erated on. Interestingly, there are 2 recent, large studies that suggest that mortality of patients with MACS is mainly in- creased in the cohort below the age of 65 years40,237 and in one of these studies particularly women younger than 65 years were affected.40 Thus, these patient group could po- tentially benefit most from a therapeutic intervention. However, data from intervention studies are not available yet.
However, there was consensus that when surgery is consid- ered due to MACS, ACTH-independency has to be proven by a suppressed or low basal morning plasma ACTH. If not, oth- er reasons for cortisol excess have to be considered. Moreover, the panel felt that cortisol nonsuppressibility should be con- firmed by repeating a 1-mg DST prior surgery.
In theory, an alternative approach could be medical ther- apy. However, the evidence for such an approach is still too low to give any recommendation.
· R.3.9 We recommend excluding pheochromocytoma by measurement of plasma free metanephrines or urinary fractionated metanephrines in all patients with adrenal le- sions with features not typical for a benign adenoma (eg, unenhanced HU> 10).
Reasoning
Recent studies have consistently shown that the possibility that an adrenal tumor with HU ≤ 10 in unenhanced CT be a pheochromocytoma is close to zero.7,238,239 Thus, it seems to be reasonable to avoid measuring metanephrines in patients with clear CT features of an adrenal adenoma. This holds probably also true, if an adrenal MRI with chemical shift clearly indicated an adenoma. However, here are no published data available. In patients with indeterminate imaging fea- tures, pheochromocytoma should be excluded even in the
absence of suggestive symptomatology, particularly if biopsy or removal of the tumor is planned. If no unenhanced CT is performed, it is advisable to measure plasma free metanephr- ines or urinary fractionated metanephrines.
. R.3.10 In patients with concomitant hypertension or unexplained hypokalemia, we recommend use of the aldosterone/renin ratio to evaluate primary aldosteronism.
Reasoning
For details we refer to the most recent guidelines of other so- cieties and reviews (eg, 63,240-244)
5.4. Surgical treatment
. R.4.1 We recommend adrenalectomy as the standard of care for unilateral adrenal tumors with clinically signifi- cant hormone excess (Figure 7). In patients with MACS, surgery can be considered in patients with relevant co- morbidities, taking into account individual factors (de- tailed in R.3.8).
Reasoning
As covered by several other guidelines, there is consensus that adrenal tumors leading to clinically significant hormone excess (eg, primary aldosteronism, Cushing’s syndrome, or pheochromocytoma) should be surgically removed.36,62,63,241 In patients with MACS, surgery can be considered in patients with relevant co-morbidities, taking into account individual factors (detailed in R.3.8). The guideline group is convinced that for these tumors the same rules regarding the surgical ap- proach should apply as for endocrine inactive tumors (see be- low). There are no substantiated reasons why the surgical approach for hormone-producing tumors should differ from that in endocrine inactive tumors (R.4.4-4.6).
· R.4.2 We recommend against performing surgery in pa- tients with an asymptomatic, nonfunctioning unilateral adrenal mass and obvious benign features on imaging studies (+000).
Reasoning
Most adrenal incidentalomas are nonfunctioning benign le- sions (eg, adenomas, myelolipomas) that do not cause harm. Therefore, there is broad consensus that the majority of these adrenal masses do not require surgery. The guideline group de- fined 2 criteria that need to be fulfilled to allow characteriza- tion of a unilateral adrenal lesion as not harmful: (1) imaging criteria indicating a benign lesion (see Section 5.2, Table 4) and (2) no relevant endocrine activity (see Section 5.3).
Regardless of size, when imaging characteristics suggest a benign nature of the mass, adrenalectomy is routinely not in- dicated. However, following careful MDT discussion, a more individualized approach may be considered including considering surgery for alleviation of symptoms of mass effect (eg, large myelolipoma with progressively increasing size). Finally, we voted against a certain size cutoff that indicates that surgery has to be performed. However, we acknowledge that with a larger tumor size, patients and clinicians might
Unilateral adrenal mass1
Radiological suspicion of malignancy?
No
Yes
Relevant hormone excess?2
Local invasion?
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Diameter ≤ 6cm?
No
No surgery
Minimally invasive adrenalectomy
Indiviualized surgical approach
Open adrenalectomy
feel increasingly insecure of the diagnosis, but again an indi- vidualized approach was deemed most appropriate.
· R.4.3 If surgery is indicated for a benign adrenal mass causing hormone excess (including MACS), we recom- mend that a minimally invasive approach is used (Đ000).
Reasoning
Benign adrenal masses causing MACS are usually <6 cm and can safely be removed by a minimally invasive surgical ap- proach, which causes the least patient morbidity compared to an open approach. In the unusual circumstance where such an adrenal tumor is sufficiently large to cause concern about the possibility for removal by a minimally invasive approach, con- sultation by a very experienced center is advisable.
· R.4.4 We suggest that minimally invasive adrenalectomy is performed by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients with unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy (R.2.4-2.6) and a
diameter ≤6 cm, but without evidence of local invasion (Đ000).
· R.4.5 We recommend open adrenalectomy is performed by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon for unilateral adrenal masses with radiological findings suspicious of malignancy and signs of local invasion (+000).
· R.4.6 We recommend discussion of an individualized sur- gical approach by an expert high-volume adrenal surgeon in patients that do not fall in one of the above-mentioned categories in a multidisciplinary expert team meeting (Đ000).
Reasoning
The main clinical concern of a unilateral adrenal mass, which is suspected to be malignant, is adrenocortical carcin- oma. For adrenocortical carcinoma without metastases, sur- gery is the most important single therapeutic measure. Thus, the expertise of the surgeon is of major importance. Although there is limited evidence about a specific number of operations per year to define such experience and expertise, based on the available evidence, 155,192,245-249 the panel be- lieves that a minimal annual workload of 12
adrenalectomies/year seems to be minimally required to en- sure sufficient experience in adrenal surgery, but >20 adrena- lectomies/year are desirable for those involved in surgery for potentially malignant tumors. Furthermore, for suspected adrenocortical carcinoma specific expertise in oncological sur- gery is required. In general, centralization of adrenalectomies especially in patients with suspected malignant lesion should be aimed at.
As summarized above (Section 4.3), there are 14 publica- tions on surgery for localized adrenocortical carcinoma com- paring minimally invasive versus open adrenalectomy, each with more than 10 patients per group. 154-163,165-167,250 These studies are, however, hampered by methodological flaws, and importantly none was randomized. Nevertheless, based on these data and the clinical experience of the guideline group members, it was judged that minimally invasive adrena- lectomy may be justified for tumors with radiological signs of malignancy but only where there was no evidence of local inva- sion and when surgery is performed by an expert surgeon with extensive experience in surgery for adrenocortical carcinoma. For this approach, the groups were divided on the size cutoff with 3 voting for 5 cm cutoff, 7 for 6 cm, and 2 abstaining. These sizes were selected in the belief that minimally invasive adrenalectomy is feasible without rupture of tumor capsule (a major risk factor for recurrence) and is beneficial for the patient (eg, less pain, shorter hospital stay). However, with increasing tumor size risk of tumor capsule rupture may increase. If during surgery there is a risk of tumor capsule rupture, conversion to open procedure should be performed. We acknowledge that the cutoff of 5-6 cm for minimally invasive vs open adrenalec- tomy is not based on good evidence from clinical studies, and we recognize that minimally invasive adrenalectomy for tumors <6 cm is common practice in most centers. However, this cutoff by no means indicates that every tumor smaller than 5-6 cm has to undergo minimally invasive adrenalectomy and every tumor larger than 5-6 cm open adrenalectomy. We are convinced that in many cases an individualized decision process is required to find the best surgical approach for a given patient. This is also true for all patients that do not fall in one of the categories de- scribed in R.4.2-4.5. Other data point the importance of ad- equate lymphadenectomy for adrenocortical carcinoma to improve survival,251-253 and the potential technical improve- ments that may be afforded by robotic approaches, 164,254,255 but these approaches require further validation.
There are no sufficiently powered studies published on the best approach to patients with stage III adrenocortical carcin- oma (local invasion, lymph nodes metastases, or tumor throm- bus in the renal vein or vena cava). However, the guideline group unanimously voted for open adrenalectomy as standard procedure for this stage of disease, in line with current clinical practice.256-258
· R.4.7 We recommend perioperative glucocorticoid treat- ment at surgical stress doses in all patients undergoing surgery and a preoperative morning serum cortisol >50 nmol/L (1.8 µg/dL) after a 1 mg overnight dexa- methasone test.
· R.4.8 We suggest that patients with MACS (similarly to patients with adrenal Cushing’s syndrome) that under- went surgery should be followed by an endocrinologist until recovery of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function has been documented.
Reasoning
MACS may lead to adrenal insufficiency after removal of the adrenal source of cortisol. The likelihood is greater the higher the cortisol post DST and the lower the plasma ACTH (or serum DHEA-S). However, it is well documented that also patients with incompletely suppressed ACTH might de- velop postoperative adrenal insufficiency259-261 and in contrast this is not true for all patients with MACS. Due to this uncer- tainty, the group is clearly in favor of intra- and postoperative glucocorticoid replacement, preferably by hydrocortisone in pa- tients with an adrenal tumor and lack of suppression of serum cortisol on dexamethasone testing. This should follow the sug- gestions for major stress dose replacement as per international guidelines.262 Postoperatively, the glucocorticoid dose should be tapered individually by a physician experienced in this clinical scenario. Glucocorticoid therapy should not be stopped until documentation of HPA axis recovery. Since not all patients de- velop postoperative adrenal insufficiency a first analysis should take place within the first 6 weeks after surgery. Some of these patients may experience a severe glucocorticoid withdrawal syn- drome after adrenalectomy for MACS,263,264 another reason for monitoring by a physician experienced in postoperative manage- ment of patients with cortisol excess.
The panel recognized, however, that some highly experi- enced centers may perform adrenal surgery without gluco- corticoid cover; in this circumstance, the patient’s clinical status in the peri- and postoperative period must be even more closely monitored as must the biochemical parameters of the hypothalamus pituitary adrenal axis.
5.5 Follow-up of patients not undergoing adrenal surgery after initial assessment
· R.5.1 We recommend against further imaging during follow-up in patients with an adrenal lesion with clear be- nign features on imaging studies (+000).
Reasoning
Since the 2016 recommendations (based on more than 2300 patients included in follow-up studies168,265), 5 additional follow-up studies including 853 patients have been pub- lished.32,180-182 The majority of incidentalomas with typical fea- tures of adenomas on initial imaging studies are roughly stable in size although spontaneous and slow increases and decreases in size have been described. Importantly, to date, no series reported the occurrence of an adrenal malignancy in these patients regard- less of the size of the adrenocortical adenomas. Therefore, the panel was unanimously against repeating imaging investigations if the initial work-up is unequivocally consistent with a benign lesion. We also removed the cutoff for tumor size of 4 cm that was included in the recommendation of 2016.
· R.5.2 In patients with an indeterminate adrenal mass (by imaging), opting not to undergo adrenalectomy following initial assessment, we suggest one repeat noncontrast CT or MRI after 6-12 months to exclude significant growth (ĐOOO). We suggest surgical resection if the lesion en- larges by more than 20% in maximum diameter (in add- ition to at least a 5 mm increase in maximum diameter) during this period. If there is growth of the lesion below this threshold, additional imaging again after 6-12 months might be considered.
Reasoning
Contrary to benign adrenal tumors that may exhibit a slow growth with time, malignant adrenal lesions (mostly adreno- cortical carcinoma and metastases) are mostly characterized by a rapid growth within months.209,210,212 Consequently, the panel recommends performing follow-up imaging studies in adrenal incidentaloma in which the benign nature cannot be established with certainty at initial evaluation, in order to recognize a rapidly growing mass.
Lack of growth of an adrenal mass over a period of 6-12 months makes a malignant mass unlikely while surgery is recom- mended if significant rapid growth is observed. There is no gen- erally accepted definition of significant growth of an adrenal tumor. Therefore, we proposed in our last guidelines65 already the above mentioned cutoff adapting the RECIST 1.1 criteria.266
The panel is aware that there are exceptional cases of malig- nant adrenal tumor without significant growth for several years. 267,268 However, this can be considered a rare exception and does not justify following all patients with an adrenal mass with repeated imaging over years. However, in case there is some measurable growth (<20%) that does not qualify for the above-mentioned criteria, additional follow-up imaging seems justified; although data supporting this approach are lacking.
· R.5.3 We recommend against repeated hormonal work- up in patients with hormonal work-up results within the reference range at initial evaluation unless new clinical signs of endocrine activity appear or there is worsening of comorbidities (eg, hypertension, type 2 diabetes) (+000).
Reasoning
Studies with a total of more than 3000 patients with non- functioning adrenal incidentaloma confirm that the risk of de- veloping clinically relevant overt hormonal excess is extremely low: 0.0%-0.6% for Cushing’s syndrome, 0.0%-1.6% for pri- mary aldosteronism, and 0.0%-2.1% for pheochromocyto- ma. See Section 4.4.
The analysis of published studies suggests that the develop- ment of MACS occurs in approximately 5% of patients (see Figure S4). However, some panelists felt that this number is higher in their clinical experience. Nevertheless, due to the un- likely occurrence of MACS and other relevant hormonal ex- cess, and the risk of false positive results of the 1 mg DST221-224 the panel voted against systematic follow-up hor- monal investigations in patients with nonfunctioning adrenal incidentalomas at initial evaluation. However, in case of sig- nificant change in comorbidities potentially attributably to MACS, a 1-mg dexamethasone test should be repeated.
· R.5.4 In patients with MACS who do not undergo an adrenalectomy, we recommend only annual reassessment of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol (+ĐOO). For this purpose, we suggest that discharge from specialized endocrine follow-up be considered and that monitoring of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol could be undertaken by primary health care providers, if adequate surveillance for comorbidities is available in the community (@OOO). If these comorbid- ities develop or worsen, referral to an endocrinologist is suggested to reassess the endocrine status and reconsider the potential benefit of intervention.
Reasoning
As elaborated in Section 5.3, the panel considers MACS as a condition associated with several comorbidities (Table 5). However, as discussed above, it is extremely rare that patients with MACS will develop overt Cushing’s syndrome during follow-up. Therefore, the panel voted against routine endo- crine reevaluation of the hypothalamic-pituitary axis function but recommends annual clinical follow-up of comorbidities potentially attributable to cortisol in patients with MACS and, in whom an initial decision against surgery was made. For this annual evaluation the following measures seems rea- sonable: HbA1c, blood pressure (ideally as ambulatory meas- urement), LDL and HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and body weight. Due to the frequency of MACS in this cohort and the fact that the follow-up of these nonspecific comorbidities (such as hypertension, obesity, impaired glucose tolerance) is usually performed by general practitioners and primary health care providers, we would consider discharging the patient from specialized endocrine follow-up. We strongly encourage close collaboration between endocrinologists and primary health care providers and the provision of pertinent informa- tion of patients, to consider rereferral to an endocrinologist if these comorbidities worsen or if they or even signs of overt Cushing’s syndrome newly arise. A specialized clinical and endocrine reevaluation may be performed at this time to re- consider therapeutic options such as appropriate symptomatic treatment or surgical removal of the adrenal incidentaloma.
5.6. Special circumstances
5.6.1 Patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas
· R.6.1.1 We recommend that for patients with bilateral or multiple adrenal masses each adrenal lesion is assessed at the time of initial detection according to the same imaging protocol as for unilateral adrenal masses to establish whether each nodule is benign or malignant.
Reasoning
In most cases bilateral adrenal masses represent benign bi- lateral adrenocortical disease: either bilateral adenomas, mac- ronodular hyperplasia, or distinct bilateral nodules with normal or atrophic cortex intervening. However, the possibil- ity of metastases (especially in patients with known extra-adrenal malignancy), adrenal lymphoma or bilateral pheochromocytomas should also be considered. Moreover, bilateral adrenal masses may represent cooccurrence of different entities, such as adenoma, pheochromocytoma, cyst, myelolipoma, adrenocortical carcinoma, etc. Therefore, the best approach is to separately characterize each lesion following the recommendations in R.2.2-R.2.6.
. R.6.1.2 We recommend that all patients with bilateral ad- renal incidentalomas should undergo clinical and hormo- nal assessment identical to that in patients with unilateral adrenal incidentaloma.
· R.6.1.3 We suggest approaching bilateral disease accord- ing to the following 4-option schema based on the results of the imaging and hormonal work-up (Table 6; Figure 8) (1) bilateral (macronodular) hyperplasia, (2) bilateral ad- renal adenomas, (3) 2 morphologically similar, but nonadenoma-like adrenal masses, and (4) 2
| Bilateral hyperplasia | Bilateral adrenal adenomas | Two morphological similar adrenal masses (but indeterminate by imaging and hormone analysis) | Two morphological different adrenal masses | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Imaging work-up | There are 2 main forms of hyperplasia, a diffuse type without distinct nodules and a macronodular type, in which both adrenals typically harbor more than one nodule (usually with unenhanced HU < 10) and the remaining adrenals are usually thickened. | Typically, both adrenals harbor one distinct/ unambiguous adenoma (unenhanced HU < 10) and the remaining adrenal limbs are normal or thin. | Unenhanced and/or enhanced HU in CT are typically similar for the different masses (as is appearance in MRI or FDG-PET) and imaging characteristics are not typical for an adenoma. | The appearance of the adrenal masses is clearly different in unenhanced and/or enhanced CT, MRI or FDG-PET, but at least one of them has characteristics not typical of an adenoma. |
| Hormonal work-up (in addition to standard diagnostic work-up) | If congenital adrenal hyperplasia is suspected, consider measurement of basal 17-OH progesterone to diagnose (or exclude) CAH, which may be especially important to consider in case of signs, symptoms or biochemistry of hyperandrogenemia. | In case of signs, symptoms or biochemistry of hyperandrogenemia, additional measurement of basal 17-OH progesterone should be considered to exclude CAH. | In infiltrative masses (eg, lymphomas, metastases) or bilateral hemorrhages, exclusion of adrenal insufficiency is required. | Standard hormonal work-up is sufficient (see Section 5.3). |
| Clinical consequences | If CAH is excluded, consider primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia (PBMAH) as diagnosis. In the presence of multiple modules and ACTH-independent MACS, genetic testing for germline pathogenic ARMC5 variants should be offereda. In patients with MACS, unilateral adrenalectomy of the dominant side might be considered using an individualized approach considering age, degree of cortisol excess, general conditions and patient preferences. | In patients with MACS, management should follow the recommendations given in R.3.3-9. In selected patients, unilateral adrenalectomy of the dominant lesion might be considered using an individualized approach considering age, degree of cortisol excess, general conditions and patient preferences. | In pheochromocytomas, genetic testing for PPGL-associated genes is mandatory. If malignant lesions are suspected, a biopsy should be considered. | Investigation of underlying etiology needed. |
aPatients with pathogenic ARMC5 variants have typically a more severe phenotype and deserve special attention.
Abbreviations: HU, Hounsfield unit; CAH, congenital adrenal hyperplasia; MACS, mild autonomous cortisol secretion.
morphologically different adrenal masses. In patients who do not fall in one of these categories, an individual- ized management plan is needed.
· R.6.1.4 For patients with bilateral hyperplasia without autonomous cortisol secretion, we suggest measuring 17-hydroxyprogesterone to exclude CAH due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency.
. R.6.1.5 For patients with bilateral (macronodular) hyperplasia or bilateral adenomas, we recommend as- sessment of comorbidities that are potentially attribut- able to MACS.
· R.6.1.6 In patients with bilateral metastases, lymphoma, infiltrative inflammatory disease, and hemorrhages, we recommend assessment for adrenal insufficiency.
Reasoning
Hormonal excess in patients with bilateral adrenal masses may originate either from one of the lesions or bilaterally. Cushing’s syndrome, primary aldosteronism, and
pheochromocytoma(s) may all be encountered. For the clinical assessment of these entities we refer to guidelines of other so- cieties. 61-63
Due to the fact that some of the above-mentioned entities re- quire specific management, it is usually required to get advice from an experienced center with an adrenal multidisciplinary expert team meeting (see R.1.1). In general, it is helpful to dis- criminate the 4 subcategories (Table 6). A thorough analysis of the available imaging is the first important step. We have pro- vided typical examples in Figure 8. With this approach some specific hormonal tests can be restricted to a limited number of patients. For example, 17-hydroxyprogesterone is only needed in patients with bilateral hyperplasia and testing of ad- renal insufficiency is only necessary in patients with large and/ or infiltrative bilateral masses (eg, lymphomas, metastases) or bilateral hemorrhages. For example, in a study of 579 patients with adrenal metastases, bilateral adrenal metastases were found in 24% of patients at the time of initial presentation,
Capsule Cortex Medulla
Adrenal gland
A
Kidney
B
C
D
E
and 43% of patients had bilateral metastases at the end of fol- low up. In this study, despite a nonuniform testing, 12.4% of patients with bilateral lesions were diagnosed with primary adrenal insufficiency. The prevalence of primary adrenal in- sufficiency was 20% in patients with adrenal metastases >4 cm.11 To assess adrenal function, measurement of morning serum cortisol and plasma ACTH is a reasonable first step. In case of adrenal insufficiency, cortisol is low and plasma ACTH is clearly elevated. In uncertain cases, a synacthen test could be performed.262
Bilaterally enlarged adrenal glands can also be caused by underlying CAH; this can be screened by 17-hydroxyprogesterone (for details269). However, increased levels of 17-hydroxyprogesterone may also represent in- creased secretion of steroid precursors from the le- sion(s)270,271 especially in malignant tumors or in bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia. In these cases, low/sup- pressed ACTH levels are useful to distinguish from CAH.
MACS is more frequent in patients with bilateral hyperpla- sia or adenomas than in unilateral adenomas.12,40 In patients with primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia and MACS, the number of nodules correlate with the likelihood of a pathogenic germline ARMC5 variant.272 Patients with pathogenic ARMC5 variants typically have a more severe phenotype and more frequently develop signs of overt
Cushing’s syndrome.273 Thus, they deserve special attention and potentially more proactive monitoring and therapeutic management.
In patients with detected pathogenic germline alterations, genetic counseling of first-degree relatives should be offered.
· R.6.1.7 In patients with bilateral hyperplasia or bilateral adenomas and MACS, we suggest individualization of specific treatment options based on age, sex, degree of cortisol autonomy, general condition, comorbidities, and patient preference.
· R.6.1.8. We suggest against bilateral adrenalectomy in patients without clinical signs of overt Cushing’s syndrome.
Reasoning
As mentioned above, MACS is more frequently encountered in patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas, compared to those with unilateral lesions, 12,40 but there is no published evi- dence that these patients should be managed differently. Bilateral adrenalectomy is rarely indicated except when there is evidence of overt Cushing’s syndrome. Bilateral adrenalec- tomy is associated with higher morbidity compared to
unilateral surgery; the patient is dependent on lifelong adrenal replacement therapy and at risk for life-threatening adrenal crises.
In bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia there is limited evidence of beneficial effects of unilateral adrenalec- tomy.148,274 In most published studies excision of the largest le- sion was performed, based on observations that the size of the adrenal lesion correlates with the degree of cortisol excess.274 Adrenal venous sampling may aid in the lateralization of corti- sol excess but the data are very weak.273,275-277 Adrenal insuf- ficiency can occur and last for months/years after unilateral adrenalectomy and should be evaluated for and appropriately treated. Monitoring for recurrence of MACS from the remain- ing abnormal adrenal gland is important. Due to the limited available evidence, an individualized approach, considering age, degree of cortisol excess, general condition, comorbidity status and patient’s preference is reasonable. However, when bilateral surgery is potentially indicated, adrenal-sparing sur- gery might be considered.278
An alternative approach could be medical therapy. However, the evidence for such an approach is still too low to give clear guidance, but in selected patients steroidogenesis inhibitors can be considered.
A number of patients will have evidence of the presence of aberrant receptors, but routine assessment by the complex testing34,279-284 that is needed to establish the presence of these receptors is hard to justify based on the fact that in the majority of patients long-term management will not be based on knowledge of receptor activity, and therefore, we do not advise use of such testing in routine clinical practice.
In patients with bilateral pheochromocytomas, adrenal- sparing surgery might be considered depending on the under- lying genetic predisposing finding. 285,286 Genetic testing is strongly advised in these patients.
5.6.2 Adrenal incidentalomas in young or elderly patients
· R.6.2.1 We recommend urgent assessment of an adrenal mass in pregnant women and individuals <40 years of age, because of a higher likelihood of malignancy and clinically significant hormone excess.
. R.6.2.2 We suggest the use of MRI rather than CT in chil- dren, adolescents, and pregnant women if dedicated ad- renal imaging is required.
· R.6.2.3 We suggest surgical resection if an adrenal mass is indeterminate on imaging in children, adolescents, preg- nant women and adults <40 years of age.
. R.6.2.4 We recommend that investigation and manage- ment of patients with poor general health and a high degree of frailty be kept in proportion to potential clinical gain.
Reasoning
The incidence of adrenal incidentaloma shows clear vari- ation with age, with the majority of patients presenting in the fifth to seventh decade of life. Overall incidence of adrenal incidentaloma in a population undergoing routine imaging not related to suspected adrenal disease is reported as 1%-4%.2,21,23,24,68,287 While 10% or more of individuals old- er than 70 years harbor an adrenal mass detectable upon im- aging or autopsy, adrenal nodules in individuals <40 years are much less prevalent and are a rarity in children and young adults. Consequently, work-up in young patients including
pregnant women has to be pursued with urgency as the risk of malignancy and prevalence of relevant hormone excess in this cohort is much higher. Due to this higher pretest probabil- ity of a malignant lesion, time-consuming diagnostic proce- dures should be avoided and surgery, if indicated, should not be significantly delayed. In contrast to the typical patient with adrenal incidentaloma (usually > 50 years), we would consider 1 follow-up imaging after 12 months also for a pre- sumably benign adrenal mass in very young patients.
Conversely, a smaller adrenal incidentaloma in an elderly patient without history of extra-adrenal malignancy can be assumed to have a very low pretest probability of malig- nancy. Thus work-up in elderly patients only needs to be ex- pedited if there are clear signs of suspicion of malignancy and the extent of imaging work-up should be kept in propor- tion to the clinical performance status of the individual and the expected clinical gain of further work-up in an affected patient. There is also increasing evidence that cortisol after dexamethasone is more frequently elevated in elderly, 12,40 but the clinical consequences appear less significant in this cohort.40
As radiation safety is even more important in the young pa- tient, we suggest MRI as the preferred imaging technique in this age group. However, adapted low-dose unenhanced CT protocols can limit radiation exposure and can be considered as an alternative (especially if the availability of MRI is limited or cannot be tolerated).
5.6.3 Patients with a newly diagnosed adrenal mass and a history of extra-adrenal malignancy
General remarks:
In principle, for adrenal masses in patients with known extra-adrenal malignancy the same recommendations apply as described above (Figure 9). However, in this situation, it is particularly important to consider the different pretest prob- abilities of the nature of the lesion and the life expectancy of the patient.
In patients with underlying extra-adrenal malignancy and an indeterminate adrenal mass, studies revealed a high rate of malignancy, up to 70%. Although age specific subgroup data are not available, it can be assumed that older patients have a higher likelihood of co-existent benign adenomas. Conversely, younger patients with an underlying malignancy are more likely to have a metastasis.
· R.6.3.1 We recommend measurement of plasma or urin- ary metanephrines to exclude pheochromocytoma in pa- tients with extra-adrenal malignancy with an indeterminate mass, even if the adrenal mass is likely to be a metastasis. We suggest additional hormonal work-up based on an individualized approach.
Reasoning
It is almost impossible to distinguish a pheochromocytoma from a metastasis in the adrenal by conventional imaging (in- cluding FDG-PET/CT). Furthermore, pheochromocytomas can lead to life-threatening complications, especially in the context of medical interventions (surgery, biopsies etc.).62,288,289 Additional hormonal work-up should depend on the stage of the extra-adrenal malignancy and life expect- ancy. However, clinicians should be aware that the evidence of adrenal hormone excess indicating that the mass is a
Adrenal mass in a patient with extra-adrenal malignancy1
Benign radiological features
Yes
No
Relevant hormone excess?
Exclude pheochromocytoma, other test individualized2
Yes
No
Would the result of pathalogical assessment alter clinical management?3
No
Yes
Consider individualized treatment
Management as for primary malignancy
Adrenal biopsy, FDG-PET/CT or resection
primary adrenal lesion can influence management of the extra- adrenal malignancy.
. R.6.3.2 We recommend that in patients with a history of extra-adrenal malignancy adrenal lesions characterized as benign by noncontrast CT require no further specific ad- renal imaging follow-up.
· R.6.3.3 In patients with a history of extra-adrenal malig- nancy, strong FDG uptake in the adrenal gland(s) on PET-CT is suggestive of metastasis. In case of moderate or no FDG uptake, further work-up with at least unen- hanced CT is recommended.
Reasoning
Although some studies indicate that few adrenal metasta- ses may have HU ≤20,8,76 the vast majority of adrenal
masses with HU ≤20 are benign and imaging that is being used for investigation and follow-up of the underlying malig- nancy is usually sufficient for these patients. As mentioned in R.2.4-6, FDG-PET/CT is-despite several limitations-cur- rently probably the most reliable imaging method in the as- sessment of an adrenal mass that is indeterminate by unenhanced CT. Although there are few malignant lesions that are FDG-negative, especially renal cancer, FDG-uptake will be high in most adrenal metastases.
However, clinicians have to be aware that also a subset of be- nign tumors (especially if they are endocrine active) are FDG-positive.51 If the FDG-PET/CT was performed with only a contrast-enhanced CT in venous phase, an unen- hanced CT (or additional imaging methods; see Table 4) might be needed to determine if the lesion is benign or malignant.
· R.6.3.4 For indeterminate lesions in patients with a his- tory of extra-adrenal malignancy, in whom the clinical management will be altered by the demonstration that the adrenal lesion is malignant, we suggest performing ei- ther an FDG-PET/CT (if not done already), surgical resec- tion or a biopsy (see also R.6.3.5). In all other patients, we recommend imaging follow-up at the same interval as im- aging for the primary malignancy.
Reasoning
In many patients with advanced extra-adrenal malignancy (eg, with multiple metastases) the knowledge of the origin of the adrenal mass will not alter the clinical management of the patient. If, however, clinical management would be altered by the demonstration that the adrenal lesion is a metastasis, then every effort should be made to allow this discrimination. If a unilateral adrenal mass is potentially the only metastasis and if resection of this metastasis seems to be reasonable from an oncological point of view, then surgery should be con- sidered. Regarding biopsy, we refer to the criteria provided in R.6.3.5.
· R.6.3.5 We recommend that 3 key criteria be fulfilled be- fore adrenal biopsy is considered: (1) the lesion is hormo- nally inactive (in particular, a pheochromocytoma has been excluded), (2) the lesion has not been conclusively characterized as benign by imaging, and (3) clinical man- agement of the patient would be altered by knowledge of the histology.
Reasoning
Adrenal biopsy may present with a significant nondiagnos- tic rate and a potential for complications86 (see also Section 4.1.2). Biopsy is only recommended for masses not character- ized as benign on imaging and where a biopsy result would af- fect clinical treatment decisions. In patients with no other obvious metastatic lesions and when surgical removal of the lesion is an option, FDG-PET/CT should be considered in or- der to exclude metastases outside the adrenal that were not vi- sualized by CT or MRI. Adrenal biopsy has lower diagnostic performance for adrenocortical carcinoma and, therefore, is not recommended in this setting.86,87 If a biopsy is necessary, this should be performed by a specialist interventional radiolo- gist/physician. In uncertain cases, it is reasonable to discuss upfront with the pathologist how much material is needed to perform a complete diagnostic work-up (eg, in lymphoma or sarcoma). Reading of the biopsy should be done by an experi- enced pathologist.
· R.6.3.6 We recommend assessment of residual adrenal function in patients with large bilateral metastases.
Reasoning
Bilateral adrenal metastases can lead to primary adrenal in- sufficiency in ~12% of patients.11 Thus, in all patients with bi- lateral metastases, primary adrenal insufficiency should be considered and clinically evaluated. The first step is measure- ment of morning serum cortisol and plasma ACTH. In case of primary adrenal insufficiency, plasma ACTH is elevated and serum cortisol is low. In uncertain cases, a synacthen test could be performed.262
If only one adrenal metastasis is present, primary adrenal in- sufficiency is extremely unlikely and usually no specific assess- ment of adrenal reserve is required.
6. Future directions and recommended research
In 2016, we formulated several research questions for future studies.65 Although some of these issues have been addressed and for some recommendations the level of evidence could be increased, only few questions have been conclusively answered. Therefore, we still see the need for clin- ical trials in all 4 areas addressed in the guideline (see Section 3.5).
Among many important research questions, we selected 10 as particularly important. All of them can only be answered in a collaborative interdisciplinary manner.
1. The value of unenhanced CT is now well established. However, at least a third of adrenal incidentaloma have HU> 10. Therefore, large cohort studies are needed in pa- tients with an adrenal incidentaloma and unenhanced HU > 10 to investigate the most suitable “second-line imaging methods” to determine if an adrenal mass is benign or not. It will be crucial to establish a definitive diagnosis either by histopathology or by long-term follow-up (> 1 years). In this context, radiomics and other artificial intelligence tools may be helpful.
2. Recently, urine steroid metabolomics for noninvasive and radiation free detection of a malignant “steroid fin- gerprint” in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma has been prospectively validated.8 After clinical routine im- plementation, real-world data are needed to confirm the value of this method.
3. In the last 2 years, large, long-term studies demonstrated an association of MACS with increased morbidity and mortality.12,39,40,237 However, all these studies were retro- spective or this association not the primary endpoint of the study. Thus, prospective studies on “hard” cardiovascular endpoints, cancer incidence, and mortality are still lacking, but they are required to define the absolute risk associated with MACS beyond classical risk factors like diabetes, hypertension, and smoking.
4. The above-mentioned studies cannot prove causality be- tween MACS and morbidity and mortality. Recently, a small randomized trial is published,145 and other trials assessing the outcome of surgery or medical therapies are underway. However, more methodologically robust randomized trials are needed on the potential benefit of surgery or medical treatment in patients with MACS. Although a control group with sham operation or pla- cebo would be ideal, we believe that this is unrealistic and might not be required. It seems to be more import- ant to define surrogate endpoints (eg, hypertension or type 2 diabetes) that can be well controlled (including standardized treatment regimens) throughout the study. Furthermore, the duration of the study has to be suffi- ciently long (minimum 12 months, better 2 or 3 years), especially in trials with adrenalectomy, because the re- moval of cortisol-producing cells might lead in all hu- mans to some reduction of blood pressure or glucose level. Ideally, these randomized trials would include- after the actual randomized phase-a long-term
observational period to collect data on “hard” cardio- vascular endpoints, cancer incidence, and especially mortality.
5. The association between MACS and osteoporosis is not yet well established. Thus, large prospective cohorts are required to study the performance of noninvasive radio- logical tools to accurately assess the impact of MACS on bone (including bone microarchitecture) and to evaluate the fracture risk in incidentalomas associated with MACS.
6. Currently, we rely on the diagnosis of MACS on the 1mg-DST, which has several caveats as discussed above. Very few data are available on whether a patient’s as- signment to nonfunctioning tumor or MACS remains constant over the long-term. Studies with repeated DST must provide an answer here.
7. Along the same lines, new biomarkers to identify pa- tients with clinically relevant cortisol excess would be important.
8. A prospective study (minimally invasive and/or robot- ic vs open surgery) in patients with potentially malig- nant adrenal mass without preoperative evidence of local invasion and metastases is desired to learn which surgical approach is the most suitable one for this pa- tient cohort.
9. We propose a long-term study with annual biochem- ical work-up of patients with adrenal incidentalomas to clarify if such a long-term hormonal assessment is justified. This study will also help to define the true incidence of relevant diseases like adreno- cortical carcinoma and pheochromocytoma among incidentalomas.
10. There is a need for large cohort and prospective studies on quality of life, mental health, cognition, and frailty in patients with adrenal incidentalomas, both nonfunc- tioning and the ones with MACS.
Acknowledgment
The authors of the guideline would like to thank and acknow- ledge Mark Sherlock (endocrinologist, Dublin, Ireland), Radu Mihai (surgeon, Oxford, United Kingdom), and Anand Vaidya (endocrinologist, Boston, United States), as well as Elaine Caoili (representative of the Society of Abdominal Radiology) and Pieter De Visschere (representative of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology) for their expert re- view and advise. In addition, we are grateful for valuable and critical comments of 21 members of the European Society of Endocrinology, the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors or representatives of national endocrine soci- eties. Furthermore, we thank 2 patient representatives who provided valuable feedback for the guideline. The 169 com- ments of the reviewers as well as our responses are available in Table S2.
Supplementary material
Supplementary material is available at European Journal of Endocrinology online.
Funding
This guideline was sponsored by the European Society of Endocrinology with support by the European Network for
the Study of Adrenal Tumors (ENSAT) and the COST Action “Harmonizing clinical care and research on adrenal tu- mours in European countries” (HARMONISATION) CA20122 supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology).
Declaration of interest
See Table S1.
References
1. Ebbehoj A, Li D, Kaur RJ, et al. Epidemiology of adrenal tumours in Olmsted county, Minnesota, USA: a population-based cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8(11):894-902. https:/ doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(20)30314-4
2. Jing Y, Hu J, Luo R, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of adrenal tumors in an unselected screening population : a cross-sectional study. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(10):1383-1391. https://doi. org/10.7326/M22-1619
3. Hamidi O, Raman R, Lazik N, et al. Clinical course of adrenal myelolipoma: a long-term longitudinal follow-up study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2020;93(1):11-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/ cen.14188
4. Calissendorff J, Juhlin CC, Sundin A, Bancos I, Falhammar H. Adrenal myelolipomas. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9(11):767-775. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(21) 00178-9
5. Dogra P, Rivera M, Mckenzie TJ, et al. Clinical course and im- aging characteristics of benign adrenal cysts: a single-center study of 92 patients. Eur J Endocrinol. 2022;187(3):429-437. https:/ doi.org/10.1530/EJE-22-0285
6. Dages KN, Kohlenberg JD, Young WF, Jr., et al. Presentation and outcomes of adrenal ganglioneuromas: a cohort study and a sys- tematic review of literature. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2021;95(1): 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.14460
7. Gruber LM, Hartman RP, Thompson GB, et al. Pheochromocytoma characteristics and behavior differ depending on method of discovery. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(5): 1386-1393. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2018-01707
8. Bancos I, Taylor AE, Chortis V, et al. Urine steroid metabolomics for the differential diagnosis of adrenal incidentalomas in the EURINE-ACT study: a prospective test validation study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8(9):773-781. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S2213-8587(20)30218-7
9. Ichijo T, Ueshiba H, Nawata H, Yanase T. A nationwide survey of adrenal incidentalomas in Japan: the first report of clinical and epi- demiological features. Endocr J. 2020;67(2):141-152. https://doi. org/10.1507/endocrj.EJ18-0486
10. Iniguez-Ariza NM, Kohlenberg JD, Delivanis DA, et al. Clinical, biochemical, and radiological characteristics of a single-center retrospective cohort of 705 large adrenal tumors. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes. 2018;2(1):30-39. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.mayocpiqo.2017.11.002
11. Mao JJ, Dages KN, Suresh M, Bancos I. Presentation, disease pro- gression and outcomes of adrenal gland metastases. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2020;93(5):546-554. https://doi.org/10.1111/ cen.14268
12. Prete A, Subramanian A, Bancos I, et al. Cardiometabolic disease burden and steroid excretion in benign adrenal tumors : a cross- sectional multicenter study. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(3): 325-334. https://doi.org/10.7326/M21-1737
13. Cyranska-Chyrek E, Szczepanek-Parulska E, Olejarz M, Ruchala M. Malignancy risk and hormonal activity of adrenal incidentalo- mas in a large cohort of patients from a single tertiary reference center. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(10):1872. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101872
14. Stavropoulos K, Imprialos KP, Katsiki N, et al. Primary aldoster- onism in patients with adrenal incidentaloma: is screening
appropriate for everyone? J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018;20(5):942-948. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13291
15. Mansmann G, Lau J, Balk E, Rothberg M, Miyachi Y, Bornstein SR. The clinically inapparent adrenal mass: update in diagnosis and management. Endocr Rev. 2004;25(2):309-340. https://doi. org/10.1210/er.2002-0031
16. Grumbach MM, Biller BM, Braunstein GD, et al. Management of the clinically inapparent adrenal mass (“incidentaloma”). Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(5):424-429. https://doi.org/10.7326/ 0003-4819-138-5-200303040-00013
17. Sherlock M, Scarsbrook A, Abbas A, et al. Adrenal incidentaloma. Endocr Rev. 2020;41(6):775-820. https://doi.org/1210/endrev/ bnaa008
18. Kloos RT, Gross MD, Francis IR, Korobkin M, Shapiro B. Incidentally discovered adrenal masses. Endocr Rev. 1995;16: 460-484.
19. Barzon L, Sonino N, Fallo F, Palu G, Boscaro M. Prevalence and natural history of adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2003;149:273-285. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.0.1490273
20. Mantero F, Terzolo M, Arnaldi G, et al. A survey on adrenal inci- dentaloma in Italy. Study group on adrenal tumors of the Italian Society of Endocrinology. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000;85: 637-644.
21. Bovio S, Cataldi A, Reimondo G, et al. Prevalence of adrenal inci- dentaloma in a contemporary computerized tomography series. J Endocrinol Invest. 2006;29(4):298-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF03344099
22. Benitah N, Yeh BM, Qayyum A, Williams G, Breiman RS, Coakley FV. Minor morphologic abnormalities of adrenal glands at CT: prognostic importance in patients with lung cancer. Radiology. 2005;235(2):517-522. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol. 2352031708
23. Reimondo G, Castellano E, Grosso M, et al. Adrenal incidentalo- mas are tied to increased risk of diabetes: findings from a prospect- ive study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(4):dgz284.
24. Hammarstedt L, Muth A, Wangberg B, et al. Adrenal lesion fre- quency: a prospective, cross-sectional CT study in a defined re- gion, including systematic re-evaluation. Acta Radiol. 2010;51(10):1149-1156. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841851. 2010.516016
25. Barzon L, Scaroni C, Sonino N, Fallo F, Paoletta A, Boscaro M. Risk factors and long-term follow-up of adrenal incidentalomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84:520-526.
26. Bernini GP, Moretti A, Oriandini C, Bardini M, Taurino C, Salvetti A. Long-term morphological and hormonal follow-up in a single unit on 115 patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Br J Cancer. 2005;92(6):1104-1109. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc. 6602459
27. Fagour C, Bardet S, Rohmer V, et al. Usefulness of adrenal scintig- raphy in the follow-up of adrenocortical incidentalomas: a pro- spective multicenter study. Eur J Endocrinol. 2009;160(2): 257-264. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-08-0299
28. Libe R, Dall’Asta C, Barbetta L, Baccarelli A, Beck-Peccoz P, Ambrosi B. Long-term follow-up study of patients with adrenal in- cidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2002;147:489-494. https://doi. org/10.1530/eje.0.1470489
29. Terzolo M, Bovio S, Pia A, et al. Midnight serum cortisol as a marker of increased cardiovascular risk in patients with a clinically inapparent adrenal adenoma. Eur J Endocrinol. 2005;153(2): 307-315. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.1.01959
30. Terzolo M, Osella G, Ali A, et al. Subclinical Cushing’s syndrome in adrenal incidentaloma. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1998;48(1): 89-97. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.1998.00357.x
31. Nieman LK. Update on subclinical Cushing’s syndrome. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2015;22(3):180-184. https:// doi.org/10.1097/MED.0000000000000159
32. Elhassan YS, Alahdab F, Prete A, et al. Natural history of adrenal incidentalomas with and without mild autonomous cortisol
excess: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171(2):107-116. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-3630
33. Dekkers OM, Horvath-Puho E, Jorgensen JO, et al. Multisystem morbidity and mortality in Cushing’s syndrome: a cohort study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(6):2277-2284. https://doi.org/ 10.1210/jc.2012-3582
34. Lacroix A, Feelders RA, Stratakis CA, Nieman LK. Cushing’s syn- drome. Lancet. 2015;386(9996):913-927. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0140-6736(14)61375-1
35. Neychev V, Steinberg SM, Yang L, et al. Long-term outcome of bi- lateral laparoscopic adrenalectomy measured by disease-specific questionnaire in a unique group of patients with Cushing’s syn- drome. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434- 015-4605-1
36. Nieman LK, Biller BM, Findling JW, et al. Treatment of Cushing’s syndrome: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(8):2807-2831. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2015-1818
37. Nieman LK. Cushing’s syndrome: update on signs, symptoms and biochemical screening. Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;173(4):M33-M38. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-15-0464
38. Lacroix A. Cardiometabolic morbidity of mild cortisol excess. Ann Intern Med. 2022;175(3):450-451. https://doi.org/10.7326/ M21-4526
39. Kjellbom A, Lindgren O, Puvaneswaralingam S, Londahl M, Olsen H. Association between mortality and levels of autonomous cortisol secretion by adrenal incidentalomas : a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2021;174(8):1041-1049. https://doi.org/10.7326/ M20-7946
40. Deutschbein T, Reimondo G, Di Dalmazi G, et al. Age-dependent and sex-dependent disparity in mortality in patients with adrenal incidentalomas and autonomous cortisol secretion: an inter- national, retrospective, cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2022;10(7):499-508. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213- 8587(22)00100-0
41. Caoili EM, Korobkin M, Francis IR, et al. Adrenal masses: charac- terization with combined unenhanced and delayed enhanced CT. Radiology. 2002;222(3):629-633. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol. 2223010766
42. Blake MA, Kalra MK, Sweeney AT, et al. Distinguishing benign from malignant adrenal masses: multi-detector row CT protocol with 10-minute delay. Radiology. 2006;238(2):578-585. https:// doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2382041514
43. Ilias I, Sahdev A, Reznek RH, Grossman AB, Pacak K. The optimal imaging of adrenal tumours: a comparison of different methods. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2007;14(3):587-599. https://doi.org/10. 1677/ERC-07-0045
44. Hong AR, Kim JH, Park KS, et al. Optimal follow-up strategies for adrenal incidentalomas: reappraisal of the 2016 ESE-ENSAT guidelines in real clinical practice. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;177(6):475-483. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-17-0372
45. Mackie GC, Shulkin BL, Ribeiro RC, et al. Use of [18F]fluoro- deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in evaluating locally recurrent and metastatic adrenocortical carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2006;91(7):2665-2671. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2005-2612
46. Groussin L, Bonardel G, Silvera S, et al. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron emission tomography for the diagnosis of adrenocortical tumors: a prospective study in 77 operated patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(5):1713-1722. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2008-2302
47. . Deandreis D, Leboulleux S, Caramella C, Schlumberger M, Baudin E. FDG PET in the management of patients with adrenal masses and adrenocortical carcinoma. Horm Cancer. 2011;2(6): 354-362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12672-011-0091-5
48. Launay N, Silvera S, Tenenbaum F, et al. Value of 18-F-FDG PET/ CT and CT in the diagnosis of indeterminate adrenal masses. Int J Endocrinol. 2015;2015:213875. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/ 213875
49. Nakajo M, Jinguji M, Fukukura Y, et al. FDG-PET/CT and FLT-PET/CT for differentiating between lipid-poor benign and malignant adrenal tumours. Eur Radiol. 2015;25(12): 3696-3705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3787-z
50. Delivanis DA, Bancos I, Atwell TD, et al. Diagnostic performance of unenhanced computed tomography and (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in indeter- minate adrenal tumours. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2018;88(1): 30-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.13448
51. He X, Caoili EM, Avram AM, Miller BS, Else T. 18F-FDG-PET/ CT evaluation of indeterminate adrenal masses in noncancer pa- tients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106(5):1448-1459. https:/ doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgab005
52. Salgues B, Guerin C, Amodru V, et al. Risk stratification of adrenal masses by [(18) F]FDG PET/CT: changing tactics. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2021;94(2):133-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.14338
53. McNicholas MM, Lee MJ, Mayo-Smith WW, Hahn PF, Boland GW, Mueller PR. An imaging algorithm for the differential diag- nosis of adrenal adenomas and metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165(6):1453-1459. https://doi.org/10.2214/ ajr. 165.6.7484585
54. Sahdev A, Reznek RH. Imaging evaluation of the non-functioning indeterminate adrenal mass. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2004;15(6):271-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2004.06.012
55. Korobkin M, Giordano TJ, Brodeur FJ, et al. Adrenal adenomas: relationship between histologic lipid and CT and MR findings. Radiology. 1996;200(3):743-747. https://doi.org/10.1148/ radiology.200.3.8756925
56. Korobkin M, Francis IR, Kloos RT, Dunnick NR. The incidental adrenal mass. Radiol Clin North Am. 1996;34(5):1037-1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-8389(22)00684-4
57. Haider MA, Ghai S, Jhaveri K, Lockwood G. Chemical shift MR imaging of hyperattenuating (>10 HU) adrenal masses: does it still have a role? Radiology. 2004;231(3):711-716. https://doi.org/10. 1148/radiol.2313030676
58. Young WF Jr. Conventional imaging in adrenocortical carcinoma: update and perspectives. Horm Cancer. 2011;2(6):341-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12672-011-0089-z
9. Bharwani N, Rockall AG, Sahdev A, et al. Adrenocortical carcin- oma: the range of appearances on CT and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(6):W706-W714. https://doi.org/10.2214/ AJR.10.5540
60. Becherer A, Vierhapper H, Potzi C, et al. FDG-PET in adrenocort- ical carcinoma. Cancer Biother Radiopharm. 2001;16:289-295.
61. Nieman LK, Biller BM, Findling JW, et al. The diagnosis of Cushing’s syndrome: an endocrine society clinical practice guide- line. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93(5):1526-1540. https:// doi.org/10.1210/jc.2008-0125
62. Lenders JW, Duh QY, Eisenhofer G, et al. Pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma: an endocrine society clinical practice guide- line. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(6):1915-1942. https:/ doi.org/10.1210/jc.2014-1498
63. Funder JW, Carey RM, Mantero F, et al. The management of pri- mary aldosteronism: case detection, diagnosis, and treatment: an endocrine society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(5):1889-1916. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc. 2015-4061
64. Fleseriu M, Auchus R, Bancos I, et al. Consensus on diagnosis and management of Cushing’s disease: a guideline update. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9(12):847-875. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S2213-8587(21)00235-7
65. Fassnacht M, Arlt W, Bancos I, et al. Management of adrenal in- cidentalomas: European Society of Endocrinology clinical practice guideline in collaboration with the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;175(2): G1-G34. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-16-0467
66. Bollerslev J, Rejnmark L, Marcocci C, et al. European Society of Endocrinology clinical guideline: treatment of chronic
hypoparathyroidism in adults. Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;173(2): G1-G20. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-15-0628
67. Andrews JC, Schunemann HJ, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guide- lines: 15. Going from evidence to recommendation-determinants of a recommendation’s direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):726-735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02. 003
68. Ferreira EV, Czepielewski MA, Faccin CS, Accordi MC, Furtado AP. [Prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma at computed tomog- raphy (chest and abdominal) in a general hospital in Brazil]. Arq Bras Endocrinol Metabol. 2005;49(5):769-775. https://doi.org/ 10.1590/S0004-27302005000500017
69. Pelsma I, Fassnacht M, Tsagarakis S, et al. Comorbidities in mild autonomous cortisol secretion and the effect of treatment: system- atic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Endocrinol 2023 in press
70. Kahramangil B, Kose E, Remer EM, et al. A modern assessment of cancer risk in adrenal incidentalomas: analysis of 2219 patients. Ann Surg. 2022;275(1):e238-e244. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA. 0000000000004048
71. Angelelli G, Mancini ME, Moschetta M, Pedote P, Pignataro P, Scardapane A. MDCT In the differentiation of adrenal masses: comparison between different scan delays for the evaluation of in- tralesional washout. Scientific WorldJournal. 2013;2013:957680. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/957680
72. . Schloetelburg W, Ebert I, Petritsch B, et al. Adrenal wash-out CT: moderate diagnostic value in distinguishing benign from malig- nant adrenal masses. Eur J Endocrinol. 2021;186(2):183-193. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-21-0650
73. Marty M, Gaye D, Perez P, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography to identify adenomas among adrenal incidentalomas in an endocrinological population. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;178(5):439-446. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-17-1056
74. Vilar L, Freitas MdaC, Canadas V, et al. Adrenal incidentalomas: diagnostic evaluation and long-term follow-up. Endocr Pract 2008;14(3):269-278. https://doi.org/10.4158/EP.ep.14.3.269
75. Corwin MT, Badawy M, Caoili EM, et al. Incidental adrenal nod- ules in patients without known malignancy: prevalence of malig- nancy and utility of washout CT for characterization-a multiinstitutional study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2022;219(5): 804-812. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.22.27901
76. Dinnes J, Bancos I, Ferrante di Ruffano L, et al. Management of endocrine disease: imaging for the diagnosis of malignancy in inci- dentally discovered adrenal masses: a systematic review and meta- analysis. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;175(2):R51-R64. https://doi.org/ 10.1530/EJE-16-0461
77. Sandrasegaran K, Patel AA, Ramaswamy R, et al. Characterization of adrenal masses with diffusion-weighted im- aging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(1):132-138. https://doi. org/10.2214/AJR.10.4583
78. Maurea S, Caraco C, Klain M, Mainolfi C, Salvatore M. Imaging characterization of non-hypersecreting adrenal masses. Comparison between MR and radionuclide techniques. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;48:188-197.
79. Marin D, Dale BM, Bashir MR, et al. Effectiveness of a three- dimensional dual gradient echo two-point dixon technique for the characterization of adrenal lesions at 3 tesla. Eur Radiol. 2012;22(1):259-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-011-2244-x
80. Burt M, Heelan RT, Coit D, et al. Prospective evaluation of unilat- eral adrenal masses in patients with operable non-small-cell lung cancer. Impact of magnetic resonance imaging. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;107(2):584-588; discussion 588-589. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(94)70106-7
81. Ream JM, Gaing B, Mussi TC, Rosenkrantz AB. Characterization of adrenal lesions at chemical-shift MRI: a direct intraindividual comparison of in- and opposed-phase imaging at 1.5T and 3T. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(3):536-541. https://doi.org/10. 2214/AJR.14.12941
82. Schwartz LH, Panicek DM, Koutcher JA, et al. Adrenal masses in patients with malignancy: prospective comparison of echo-planar,
fast spin-echo, and chemical shift MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;197(2):421-425. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.197.2. 7480686
83. Guerin C, Pattou F, Brunaud L, et al. Performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT in the characterization of adrenal masses in noncancer pa- tients: a prospective study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102(7): 2465-2472. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2017-00254
84. Nunes ML, Rault A, Teynie J, et al. 18F-FDG PET for the identi- fication of adrenocortical carcinomas among indeterminate ad- renal tumors at computed tomography scanning. World J Surg. 2010;34(7):1506-1510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010- 0576-3
85. Tessonnier L, Sebag F, Palazzo FF, et al. Does 18F-FDG PET/CT add diagnostic accuracy in incidentally identified non-secreting ad- renal tumours? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(11): 2018-2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0849-3
86. Bancos I, Tamhane S, Shah M, et al. Diagnosis of endocrine dis- ease: the diagnostic performance of adrenal biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;175(2): R65-R80. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-16-0297
87. Delivanis DA, Erickson D, Atwell TD, et al. Procedural and clinic- al outcomes of percutaneous adrenal biopsy in a high-risk popula- tion for adrenal malignancy. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2016;85(5): 710-716. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.13117
88. Zhang CD, Erickson D, Levy MJ, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of ad- renal metastasis in a high-risk population. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(12):1402-1407. https://doi.org/10.4158/EP-2017-0022
89. . Novotny AG, Reynolds JP, Shah AA, et al. Fine-needle aspiration of adrenal lesions: a 20-year single institution experience with comparison of percutaneous and endoscopic ultrasound guided approaches. Diagn Cytopathol. 2019;47(10):986-992. https:/ doi.org/10.1002/dc.24261
90. Martin-Cardona A, Fernandez-Esparrach G, Subtil JC, et al. EUS-guided tissue acquisition in the study of the adrenal glands: results of a nationwide multicenter study. PLoS One. 2019;14(6):e0216658. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone. 0216658
91. McDermott E, Kilcoyne A, O’Shea A, Cahalane AM, McDermott S. The role of percutaneous CT-guided biopsy of an adrenal lesion in patients with known or suspected lung cancer. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021;46(3):1171-1178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261- 020-02743-9
92. Point du Jour KS, Alwelaie Y, Coleman A, Tadros T, Aneja R, Reid MD. Adrenal gland fine needle aspiration: a multi- institutional analysis of 139 cases. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2021;10(2):168-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasc.2020.08.004
93. 3. Trabzonlu L, Jager L, Tabibi S, et al. Adrenal gland cytology re- porting: a multi-institutional proposal for a standardized report- ing system. Cancer Cytopathol. 2022;130(6):423-432. https:// doi.org/10.1002/cncy.22564
94. Orzechowski S, Gnass M, Wojtacha J, et al. Endosonography and endosonography guided needle aspiration for left adrenal gland assessment in lung cancer patients - 10 years’ experience. Adv Respir Med. 2022;90(3):157-163. https://doi.org/10.5603/ARM. a2022.0033
95. . Arlt W, Biehl M, Taylor AE, et al. Urine steroid metabolomics as a biomarker tool for detecting malignancy in adrenal tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(12):3775-3784. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2011-1565
96. Kerkhofs TM, Kerstens MN, Kema IP, Willems TP, Haak HR. Diagnostic value of urinary steroid profiling in the evaluation of adrenal tumors. Horm Cancer. 2015;6(4):168-175. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12672-015-0224-3
97. Taylor DR, Ghataore L, Couchman L, et al. A 13-steroid serum panel based on LC-MS/MS: use in detection of adrenocortical car- cinoma. Clin Chem. 2017;63(12):1836-1846. https://doi.org/10. 1373/clinchem.2017.277624
98. Hines JM, Bancos I, Bancos C, et al. High-resolution, accurate- mass (HRAM) mass spectrometry urine steroid profiling in the diagnosis of adrenal disorders. Clin Chem. 2017;63(12): 1824-1835. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.271106
99. Schweitzer S, Kunz M, Kurlbaum M, et al. Plasma steroid metab- olome profiling for the diagnosis of adrenocortical carcinoma. Eur J Endocrinol. 2019;180(2):117-125. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE- 18-0782
100. Berke K, Constantinescu G, Masjkur J, et al. Plasma steroid profil- ing in patients with adrenal incidentaloma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(3):e1181-e1192. https://doi.org/10.1210/ clinem/dgab751
101. Chiodini I, Guglielmi G, Battista C, et al. Spinal volumetric bone mineral density and vertebral fractures in female patients with ad- renal incidentalomas: the effects of subclinical hypercortisolism and gonadal status. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004;89(5): 2237-2241. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2003-031413
102. Chiodini I, Morelli V, Masserini B, et al. Bone mineral density, prevalence of vertebral fractures, and bone quality in patients with adrenal incidentalomas with and without subclinical hyper- cortisolism: an Italian multicenter study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(9):3207-3214. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2009- 0468
103. Di Dalmazi G, Vicennati V, Rinaldi E, et al. Progressively in- creased patterns of subclinical cortisol hypersecretion in adrenal incidentalomas differently predict major metabolic and cardiovas- cular outcomes: a large cross-sectional study. Eur J Endocrinol. 2012;166(4):669-677. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-11-1039
104. Eller-Vainicher C, Morelli V, Ulivieri FM, et al. Bone quality, as measured by trabecular bone score in patients with adrenal inci- dentalomas with and without subclinical hypercortisolism. J Bone Miner Res. 2012;27(10):2223-2230. https://doi.org/10. 1002/jbmr.1648
105. Androulakis II, Kaltsas GA, Kollias GE, et al. Patients with appar- ently nonfunctioning adrenal incidentalomas may be at increased cardiovascular risk due to excessive cortisol secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(8):2754-2762. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2013-4064
106. Olsen H, Nordenstrom E, Bergenfelz A, et al. Subclinical hypercor- tisolism and CT appearance in adrenal incidentalomas: a multicen- ter study from Southern Sweden. Endocrine. 2012;42(1):164-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-012-9622-2
107. Vassilatou E, Vryonidou A, Ioannidis D, Paschou SA, Panagou M, Tzavara I. Bilateral adrenal incidentalomas differ from unilateral adrenal incidentalomas in subclinical cortisol hypersecretion but not in potential clinical implications. Eur J Endocrinol. 2014;171(1):37-45. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-13-0848
108. Abe I, Sugimoto K, Miyajima T, et al. Clinical investigation of ad- renal incidentalomas in Japanese patients of the fukuoka region with updated diagnostic criteria for sub-clinical Cushing’s syn- drome. Intern Med. 2018;57(17):2467-2472. https://doi.org/10. 2169/internalmedicine.0550-17
109. Ahn SH, Kim JH, Cho YY, et al. The effects of cortisol and adrenal androgen on bone mass in asians with and without subclinical hy- percortisolism. Osteoporos Int. 2019;30(5):1059-1069. https:/ doi.org/10.1007/s00198-019-04871-5
110. Araujo-Castro M, Parra Ramirez P, Robles Lazaro C, et al. Accuracy of the dexamethasone suppression test for the prediction of autonomous cortisol secretion-related comorbidities in adrenal incidentalomas. Hormones (Athens). 2021;20(4):735-744. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s42000-021-00308-z
111. Araujo-Castro M, Robles Lazaro C, Parra Ramirez P, et al. Maximum adenoma diameter, regardless of uni- or bilaterality, is a risk factor for autonomous cortisol secretion in adrenal inci- dentalomas. J Endocrinol Invest. 2021;44(11):2349-2357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-021-01539-y
112. Ceccato F, Barbot M, Albiger N, et al. Daily salivary cortisol and cortisone rhythm in patients with adrenal incidentaloma.
Endocrine. 2018;59(3):510-519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 017-1421-3
113. Delivanis DA, Iniguez-Ariza NM, Zeb MH, et al. Impact of hyper- cortisolism on skeletal muscle mass and adipose tissue mass in pa- tients with adrenal adenomas. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2018;88(2): 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.13512
114. Delivanis DA, Hurtado Andrade MD, Cortes T, et al. Abnormal body composition in patients with adrenal adenomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2021;185(5):653-662. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE- 21-0458
115. Di Dalmazi G, Quinkler M, Deutschbein T, et al. Cortisol-related metabolic alterations assessed by mass spectrometry assay in pa- tients with Cushing’s syndrome. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;177(2): 227-237. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-17-0109
116. Di Dalmazi G, Fanelli F, Zavatta G, et al. The steroid profile of ad- renal incidentalomas: subtyping subjects with high cardiovascular risk. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(11):5519-5528. https:/ doi.org/10.1210/jc.2019-00365
117. Di Dalmazi G, Vicennati V, Pizzi C, et al. Prevalence and incidence of atrial fibrillation in a large cohort of adrenal incidentalomas: a long-term study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(8). https:/ doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa270
118. Falcetta P, Orsolini F, Benelli E, et al. Clinical features, risk of mass enlargement, and development of endocrine hyperfunction in pa- tients with adrenal incidentalomas: a long-term follow-up study. Endocrine. 2021;71(1):178-188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 020-02476-1
119. Ishida A, Igarashi K, Ruike Y, et al. Association of urinary free cor- tisol with bone formation in patients with mild autonomous corti- sol secretion. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2021;94(4):544-550. https:// doi.org/10.1111/cen.14385
120. Kong SH, Kim JH, Shin CS. Contralateral adrenal thinning as a distinctive feature of mild autonomous cortisol excess of the ad- renal tumors. Eur J Endocrinol. 2020;183(3):325-333. https:/ doi.org/10.1530/EJE-20-0301
121. Masserini B, Morelli V, Palmieri S, et al. Lipid abnormalities in pa- tients with adrenal incidentalomas: role of subclinical hypercortis- olism and impaired glucose metabolism. J Endocrinol Invest. 2015;38(6):623-628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-014-0232-0
122. Morelli V, Ghielmetti A, Caldiroli A, et al. Mental health in pa- tients with adrenal incidentalomas: is there a relation with differ- ent degrees of cortisol secretion? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106(1):e130-e139. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa695
123. Morelli V, Scillitani A, Arosio M, Chiodini I. Follow-up of patients with adrenal incidentaloma, in accordance with the European so- ciety of endocrinology guidelines: could we be safe? J Endocrinol Invest. 2017;40(3):331-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-016- 0558-x
124. Sbardella E, Minnetti M, D’Aluisio D, et al. Cardiovascular fea- tures of possible autonomous cortisol secretion in patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;178(5): 501-511. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-17-0986
125. Singh S, Atkinson EJ, Achenbach SJ, LeBrasseur N, Bancos I. Frailty in patients with mild autonomous cortisol secretion is high- er than in patients with nonfunctioning adrenal tumors. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(9):e3307-e3315. https://doi.org/10. 1210/clinem/dgaa410
126. Thompson LH, Ranstam J, Almquist M, Nordenstrom E, Bergenfelz A. Impact of adrenalectomy on morbidity in patients with non-functioning adrenal cortical tumours, mild hypercortis- olism and Cushing’s syndrome as assessed by national and quality registries. World J Surg. 2021;45(10):3099-3107. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00268-021-06214-0
127. Kim BJ, Kwak MK, Ahn SH, Kim JS, Lee SH, Koh JM. The asso- ciation of cortisol and adrenal androgen with trabecular bone score in patients with adrenal incidentaloma with and without au- tonomous cortisol secretion. Osteoporos Int. 2018;29(10): 2299-2307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-018-4608-4
128. Moraes AB, Cavalari EMR, de Paula MP, et al. Evaluation of body composition using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in patients with non-functioning adrenal incidentalomas and an intermediate phenotype: is there an association with metabolic syndrome? J Endocrinol Invest. 2019;42(7):797-807. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40618-018-0985-y
129. Sojat AS, Dunjic-Kostic B, Marina LV, et al. Depression: another cortisol-related comorbidity in patients with adrenal incidentalo- mas and (possible) autonomous cortisol secretion. J Endocrinol Invest. 2021;44(9):1935-1945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618- 021-01509-4
130. Debono M, Bradburn M, Bull M, Harrison B, Ross RJ, Newell-Price J. Cortisol as a marker for increased mortality in pa- tients with incidental adrenocortical adenomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(12):4462-4470. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2014- 3007
131. Di Dalmazi G, Vicennati V, Garelli S, et al. Cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with adrenal incidentalomas that are ei- ther non-secreting or associated with intermediate phenotype or subclinical Cushing’s Syndrome: a 15-year retrospective study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014;2(5):396-405. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70211-0
132. Giordano R, Marinazzo E, Berardelli R, et al. Long-term morpho- logical, hormonal, and clinical follow-up in a single unit on 118 patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2010;162(4):779-785. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-09-0957
133. Morelli V, Eller-Vainicher C, Salcuni AS, et al. Risk of new verte- bral fractures in patients with adrenal incidentaloma with and without subclinical hypercortisolism: a multicenter longitudinal study. J Bone Miner Res. 2011;26(8):1816-1821. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/jbmr.398
134. Morelli V, Reimondo G, Giordano R, et al. Long-term follow-up in adrenal incidentalomas: an Italian multicenter study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(3):827-834. https://doi.org/10.1210/ jc.2013-3527
135. Ceccato F, Antonelli G, Frigo AC, et al. First-line screening tests for Cushing’s syndrome in patients with adrenal incidentaloma: the role of urinary free cortisol measured by LC-MS/MS. J Endocrinol Invest. 2017;40(7):753-760. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40618-017-0644-8
136. Araujo-Castro M, Robles Lazaro C, Parra Ramirez P, Cuesta Hernandez M, Sampedro Nunez MA, Marazuela M. Cardiometabolic profile of non-functioning and autonomous cortisol-secreting adrenal incidentalomas. Is the cardiometabolic risk similar or are there differences? Endocrine. 2019;66(3): 650-659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-019-02066-w
137. Li D, Kaur RJ, Zhang CD, et al. Risk of bone fractures after the diagnosis of adrenal adenomas: a population-based cohort study. Eur J Endocrinol. 2021;184(4):597-606. https://doi.org/10.1530/ EJE-20-1396
138. Papanastasiou L, Alexandraki KI, Androulakis II, et al. Concomitant alterations of metabolic parameters, cardiovascular risk factors and altered cortisol secretion in patients with adrenal incidentalomas during prolonged follow-up. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2017;86(4):488-498. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.13294
139. Patrova J, Kjellman M, Wahrenberg H, Falhammar H. Increased mortality in patients with adrenal incidentalomas and autono- mous cortisol secretion: a 13-year retrospective study from one center. Endocrine. 2017;58(2):267-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12020-017-1400-8
140. Petramala L, Olmati F, Concistre A, et al. Cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors in patients with subclinical cushing. Endocrine. 2020;70(1):150-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 020-02297-2
141. Yener S, Baris M, Peker A, Demir O, Ozgen B, Secil M. Autonomous cortisol secretion in adrenal incidentalomas and in- creased visceral fat accumulation during follow-up. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2017;87(5):425-432. https://doi.org/10.1111/ cen.13408
142. Zhang CD, Li D, Kaur RJ, et al. Cardiometabolic outcomes and mortality in patients with adrenal adenomas in a population-based setting. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106(11):3320-3330. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgab468
143. Minnetti M, Hasenmajer V, Sbardella E, et al. Susceptibility and characteristics of infections in patients with glucocorticoid excess or insufficiency: the ICARO tool. Eur J Endocrinol. 2022;187(5): 719-731. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-22-0454
144. Toniato A, Merante-Boschin I, Opocher G, Pelizzo MR, Schiavi F, Ballotta E. Surgical versus conservative management for subclin- ical Cushing syndrome in adrenal incidentalomas: a prospective randomized study. Ann Surg. 2009;249(3):388-391. https://doi. org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819a47d2
145. Morelli V, Frigerio S, Aresta C, et al. Adrenalectomy improves blood pressure and metabolic control in patients with possible au- tonomous cortisol secretion: results of a RCT. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13:898084. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo. 2022.898084
146. Chiodini I, Morelli V, Salcuni AS, et al. Beneficial metabolic effects of prompt surgical treatment in patients with an adrenal inciden- taloma causing biochemical hypercortisolism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(6):2736-2745. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2009- 2387
147. Iacobone M, Citton M, Viel G, et al. Adrenalectomy may improve cardiovascular and metabolic impairment and ameliorate quality of life in patients with adrenal incidentalomas and subclinical Cushing’s syndrome. Surgery. 2012;152(6):991-997. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.surg.2012.08.054
148. Perogamvros I, Vassiliadi DA, Karapanou O, Botoula E, Tzanela M, Tsagarakis S. Biochemical and clinical benefits of unilateral adrenalectomy in patients with subclinical hypercortisolism and bilateral adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;173(6): 719-725. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-15-0566
149. Petramala L, Cavallaro G, Galassi M, et al. Clinical benefits of uni- lateral adrenalectomy in patients with subclinical hypercortisolism due to adrenal incidentaloma: results from a single center. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2017;24(1):69-75. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s40292-017-0182-7
150. Salcuni AS, Morelli V, Eller Vainicher C, et al. Adrenalectomy re- duces the risk of vertebral fractures in patients with monolateral adrenal incidentalomas and subclinical hypercortisolism. Eur J Endocrinol. 2016;174(3):261-269. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE- 15-0977
151. Tsuiki M, Tanabe A, Takagi S, Naruse M, Takano K. Cardiovascular risks and their long-term clinical outcome in pa- tients with subclinical Cushing’s syndrome. Endocr J. 2008;55(4):737-745. https://doi.org/10.1507/endocrj.K07E-177
152. Wang D, Ji ZG, Li HZ, Zhang YS. Adrenalectomy was recom- mended for patients with subclinical Cushing’s syndrome due to adrenal incidentaloma. Cancer Biomark. 2018;21(2):367-372. https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-170531
153. Araujo-Castro M, Minguez Ojeda C, Sanchez Ramirez MN, Gomez Dos Santos V, Pascual-Corrrales E, Fernandez-Argueso M. Adrenalectomy improves blood pressure control in nonfunc- tioning adrenal incidentalomas and glycemic and lipid control in patients with autonomous cortisol secretion. Endocrine. 2022;78(1):142-150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-022- 03120-w
154. Brix D, Allolio B, Fenske W, et al. Laparoscopic versus open adre- nalectomy for adrenocortical carcinoma: surgical and oncologic outcome in 152 patients. Eur Urol. 2010;58(4):609-615. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.06.024
155. Cooper AB, Habra MA, Grubbs EG, et al. Does laparoscopic adre- nalectomy jeopardize oncologic outcomes for patients with adre- nocortical carcinoma? Surg Endosc. 2013;27(11):4026-4032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3034-0
156. Donatini G, Caiazzo R, Do CC, et al. Long-term survival after adrenalectomy for stage I/II adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC): a retrospective comparative cohort study of laparoscopic versus
open approach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(1):284-291. https:// doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3164-6
157. Fossa A, Rosok BI, Kazaryan AM, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery in stage I-III adrenocortical carcinoma-a retrospective comparison of 32 patients. Acta Oncol. 2013;52(8):1771-1777. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2013.765065
158. Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, De CC, et al. Open versus endoscopic adrenalectomy in the treatment of localized (stage I/II) adrenocort- ical carcinoma: results of a multiinstitutional Italian survey. Surgery. 2012;152(6):1158-1164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg. 2012.08.014
159. Miller BS, Ammori JB, Gauger PG, Broome JT, Hammer GD, Doherty GM. Laparoscopic resection is inappropriate in patients with known or suspected adrenocortical carcinoma. World J Surg. 2010;34(6):1380-1385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268- 010-0532-2
160. Miller BS, Gauger PG, Hammer GD, Doherty GM. Resection of adrenocortical carcinoma is less complete and local recurrence oc- curs sooner and more often after laparoscopic adrenalectomy than after open adrenalectomy. Surgery. 2012;152(6):1150-1157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2012.08.024
161. Mir MC, Klink JC, Guillotreau J, et al. Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and open adrenalectomy for adrenocortical carcin- oma: single, high-volume center experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(5):1456-1461. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012- 2760-1
162. Porpiglia F, Fiori C, Daffara F, et al. Retrospective evaluation of the outcome of open versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy for stage I and II adrenocortical cancer. Eur Urol. 2010;57(5):873-878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.01.036
163. Calcatera NA, Hsiung-Wang C, Suss NR, Winchester DJ, Moo-Young TA, Prinz RA. Minimally invasive adrenalectomy for adrenocortical carcinoma: five-year trends and predictors of conversion. World J Surg. 2018;42(2):473-481. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00268-017-4290-2
164. Hue JJ, Ahorukomeye P, Bingmer K, et al. A comparison of robotic and laparoscopic minimally invasive adrenalectomy for adrenal malignancies. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(7):5374-5381. https://doi. org/10.1007/s00464-021-08827-x
165. Kastelan D, Knezevic N, Zibar Tomsic K, et al. Open vs laparo- scopic adrenalectomy for localized adrenocortical carcinoma. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2020;93(4):404-408. https://doi.org/10. 1111/cen.14251
166. Maurice MJ, Bream MJ, Kim SP, Abouassaly R. Surgical quality of minimally invasive adrenalectomy for adrenocortical carcinoma: a contemporary analysis using the national cancer database. BJU Int. 2017;119(3):436-443. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.13618
167. Wu K, Liu Z, Liang J, et al. Laparoscopic versus open adrenalec- tomy for localized (stage 1/2) adrenocortical carcinoma: experi- ence at a single, high-volumecenter. Surgery. 2018;164(6): 1325-1329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2018.07.026
168. Cawood TJ, Hunt PJ, O’Shea D, Cole D, Soule S. Recommended evaluation of adrenal incidentalomas is costly, has high false- positive rates and confers a risk of fatal cancer that is similar to the risk of the adrenal lesion becoming malignant; time for a re- think? Eur J Endocrinol. 2009;161(4):513-527. https://doi.org/ 10.1530/EJE-09-0234
169. Cho YY, Suh S, Joung JY, et al. Clinical characteristics and follow- up of Korean patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Korean J Intern Med. 2013;28(5):557-564. https://doi.org/10.3904/kjim. 2013.28.5.557
170. Comlekci A, Yener S, Ertilav S, et al. Adrenal incidentaloma, clin- ical, metabolic, follow-up aspects: single centre experience. Endocrine. 2010;37(1):40-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 009-9260-5
171. Debono M, Prema A, Hughes TJ, Bull M, Ross RJ, Newell-Price J. Visceral fat accumulation and postdexamethasone serum cortisol levels in patients with adrenal incidentaloma. J Clin Endocrinol
Metab. 2013;98(6):2383-2391. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2012- 4276
172. Kim HY, Kim SG, Lee KW, et al. Clinical study of adrenal inciden- taloma in Korea. Korean J Intern Med. 2005;20(4):303-309. https://doi.org/10.3904/kjim.2005.20.4.303
173. Muth A, Hammarstedt L, Hellstrom M, Sigurjonsdottir HA, Almqvist E, Wangberg B, Sweden ASGoW. Cohort study of pa- tients with adrenal lesions discovered incidentally. Br J Surg. 2011;98(10):1383-1391. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7566
174. Muth A, Taft C, Hammarstedt L, Bjorneld L, Hellstrom M, Wangberg B. Patient-reported impacts of a conservative manage- ment programme for the clinically inapparent adrenal mass. Endocrine. 2013;44(1):228-236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 012-9856-z
175. Song JH, Chaudhry FS, Mayo-Smith WW. The incidental adrenal mass on CT: prevalence of adrenal disease in 1,049 consecutive ad- renal masses in patients with no known malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(5):1163-1168. https://doi.org/10.2214/ AJR.07.2799
176. Vassilatou E, Vryonidou A, Michalopoulou S, et al. Hormonal ac- tivity of adrenal incidentalomas: results from a long-term follow- up study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2009;70(5):674-679. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.2008.03492.x
177. Yener S, Ertilav S, Secil M, et al. Natural course of benign adrenal incidentalomas in subjects with extra-adrenal malignancy. Endocrine. 2009;36(1):135-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 009-9191-1
178. Araujo-Castro M, Parra Ramirez P, Robles Lazaro C, et al. Predictors of tumour growth and autonomous cortisol secretion development during follow-up in non-functioning adrenal inci- dentalomas. J Clin Med. 2021;10(23):5509.
179. Ceccato F, Tizianel I, Voltan G, et al. Attenuation value in adrenal incidentalomas: a longitudinal study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021;12:794197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo. 2021.794197
180. Collienne M, Timmesfeld N, Bergmann SR, Goebel J, Kann PH. Adrenal incidentaloma and subclinical Cushing’s syndrome: a lon- gitudinal follow-up study by endoscopic ultrasound. Ultraschall Med. 2017;38(04):411-419. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041- 107996
181. Corwin MT, Chalfant JS, Loehfelm TW, Fananapazir G, Lamba R, Mayo-Smith WW. Incidentally detected bilateral adrenal nod- ules in patients without cancer: is further workup necessary? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210(4):780-784. https://doi.org/10. 2214/AJR.17.18543
182. Goh Z, Phillips I, Hunt PJ, Soule S, Cawood TJ. Three-year follow up of adrenal incidentalomas in a New Zealand centre. Intern Med J. 2020;50(3):350-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.14332
183. Kastelan D, Kraljevic I, Dusek T, et al. The clinical course of pa- tients with adrenal incidentaloma: is it time to reconsider the cur- rent recommendations? Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;173(2):275-282. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-15-0199
184. Li T, Li W, Fang X, Lv Q, Song Y, Shi Y. Comprehensive analysis on 559 cases of adrenal incidentalomas in the elderly Chinese. Aging Med (Milton). 2018;1(1):35-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/ agm2.12006
185. Schalin-Jantti C, Raade M, Hamalainen E, Sane T. A 5-year pro- spective follow-up study of lipid-rich adrenal incidentalomas: no tumor growth or development of hormonal hypersecretion. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul). 2015;30(4):481-487. https://doi.org/ 10.3803/EnM.2015.30.4.481
186. Yeomans H, Calissendorff J, Volpe C, Falhammar H, Mannheimer B. Limited value of long-term biochemical follow-up in patients with adrenal incidentalomas-a retrospective cohort study. BMC Endocr Disord. 2015;15(1):6. https://doi.org/10. 1186/s12902-015-0001-x
187. Vasilev V, Matrozova J, Elenkova A, Zacharieva S. Clinical char- acteristics and follow-up of incidentally found adrenal tumours -
results from a single tertiary centre. Cent Eur J Med. 2014;9: 292-301.
188. Anagnostis P, Efstathiadou Z, Polyzos SA, et al. Long term follow- up of patients with adrenal incidentalomas-a single center experi- ence and review of the literature. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2010;118(9):610-616. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1237704
189. Tsvetov G, Shimon I, Benbassat C. Adrenal incidentaloma: clinical characteristics and comparison between patients with and without extraadrenal malignancy. J Endocrinol Invest. 2007;30(8): 647-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03347444
190. Yilmaz N, Avsar E, Tazegul G, Sari R, Altunbas H, Balci MK. Clinical characteristics and follow-up results of adrenal incidenta- loma. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2021;129(5):349-356. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1079-4915
191. Giordano TJ, Berney D, de Krijger RR, et al. Data set for reporting of carcinoma of the adrenal cortex: explanations and recommen- dations of the guidelines from the international collaboration on cancer reporting. Hum Pathol. 2021;110:50-61. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.humpath.2020.10.001
192. Mihai R, Donatini G, Vidal O, Brunaud L. Volume-outcome cor- relation in adrenal surgery-an ESES consensus statement. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2019;404(7):795-806. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00423-019-01827-5
193. Savitz A, Fong B, Hochberg A, et al. Endocrine tumor board: ten years’ experience of a multidisciplinary clinical working confer- ence. Perm J. 2020;24(4):19.140. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/ 19.140
194. Stone BV, Tallman JE, Moses KA. Disparate practice patterns and survival outcomes: the impact of centralization of cancer care for adrenocortical carcinoma in the United States. J Urol. 2021;206(4):866-872. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.00000000000 01871
195. Zhang J, Yang J, Libianto R, et al. Impact of dedicated multidiscip- linary service on patient selection and outcomes for surgical treat- ment of primary aldosteronism. Surgery. 2022;172(6):1682-1688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2022.08.010
196. Rodacki K, Ramalho M, Dale BM, et al. Combined chemical shift imaging with early dynamic serial gadolinium-enhanced MRI in the characterization of adrenal lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203(1):99-106. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11731
197. Seo JM, Park BK, Park SY, Kim CK. Characterization of lipid- poor adrenal adenoma: chemical-shift MRI and washout CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(5):1043-1050. https://doi.org/ 10.2214/AJR.13.11389
198. Taffel MT, Petrocelli RD, Rigau D, et al. Prevalence of malignancy in adrenal nodules with heterogeneous microscopic fat on chemical-shift MRI: a multiinstitutional study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2023;220(1):86-94. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.22. 27976
199. Karam M, Novak L, Cyriac J, Ali A, Nazeer T, Nugent F. Role of fluorine-18 fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with low-grade lymphomas. Cancer. 2006;107(1):175-183. https://doi.org/10. 1002/cncr.21967
200. Tsukamoto N, Kojima M, Hasegawa M, et al. The usefulness of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ((18) F-FDG-PET) and a comparison of (18)F-FDG-pet with (67)gal- lium scintigraphy in the evaluation of lymphoma: relation to histo- logic subtypes based on the world health organization classification. Cancer. 2007;110:652-659.
201. Zukotynski K, Lewis A, O’Regan K, et al. PET/CT and renal path- ology: a blind spot for radiologists? Part 1, primary pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(2):W163-W167. https://doi. org/10.2214/AJR.11.7790
202. Ansquer C, Scigliano S, Mirallie E, et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT in the characterization and surgical decision concerning adrenal masses: a prospective multicentre evaluation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(9):1669-1678. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00259-010-1471-8
203. Libe R, Pais A, Violon F, et al. Positive correlation between 18F-FDG uptake and tumor-proliferating antigen Ki-67 expres- sion in adrenocortical carcinomas. Clin Nucl Med. 2023;48: 381-386. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0000000000004593
204. Timmers HJ, Chen CC, Carrasquillo JA, et al. Comparison of 18F-fluoro-L-DOPA, 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose, and 18F-fluorodopamine PET and 123I-MIBG scintigraphy in the lo- calization of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(12):4757-4767. https://doi.org/10. 1210/jc.2009-1248
205. Alencar GA, Fragoso MC, Yamaga LY, Lerario AM, Mendonca BB. (18)F-FDG-PET/CT imaging of ACTH-independent macro- nodular adrenocortical hyperplasia (AIMAH) demonstrating in- creased (18)F-FDG uptake. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96(11):3300-3301. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-1397
206. Herndon J, Nadeau AM, Davidge-Pitts CJ, Young WF, Bancos I. Primary adrenal insufficiency due to bilateral infiltrative disease. Endocrine. 2018;62(3):721-728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020- 018-1737-7
207. Patel S, Jinjuvadia R, Devara A, et al. Performance characteristics of EUS-FNA biopsy for adrenal lesions: a meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound. 2019;8(3):180-187. https://doi.org/10.4103/eus.eus_ 42_18
208. Naffouje SA, Sabesan A, Hallanger-Johnson J, Kirtane K, Gonzalez RJ, Mullinax J. Adrenal biopsy, as a diagnostic method, is associated with decreased overall survival in patients with T1/T2 adrenocortical carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Surg Oncol. 2021;124(8):1261-1271. https://doi.org/10.1002/ jso.26639
209. Berruti A, Baudin E, Gelderblom H, et al. Adrenal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(Suppl 7):vii131-vii138. https://doi.org/10. 1093/annonc/mds231
210. Fassnacht M, Kroiss M, Allolio B. Update in adrenocortical car- cinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(12):4551-4564. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3020
211. Libe R, Fratticci A, Bertherat J. Adrenocortical cancer: patho- physiology and clinical management. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2007;14(1):13-28. https://doi.org/10.1677/erc.1.01130
212. Else T, Kim AC, Sabolch A, et al. Adrenocortical carcinoma. Endocr Rev. 2014;35(2):282-326. https://doi.org/10.1210/er. 2013-1029
213. Vogg N, Muller T, Floren A, et al. Simplified urinary steroid pro- filing by LC-MS as diagnostic tool for malignancy in adrenocort- ical tumors. Clin Chim Acta. 2023;543:117301. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cca.2023.117301
214. Fassnacht M, Allolio B. Clinical management of adrenocortical carcinoma. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;23(2): 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2008.10.008
215. Fassnacht M, Kenn W, Allolio B. Adrenal tumors: how to establish malignancy? J Endocrinol Invest. 2004;27(4):387-399. https://doi. org/10.1007/BF03351068
216. Dennedy MC, Annamalai AK, Prankerd-Smith O, et al. Low DHEAS: a sensitive and specific test for the detection of subclinical hypercortisolism in adrenal incidentalomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017;102:786-792.
217. Liu MS, Lou Y, Chen H, et al. Performance of DHEAS as a screen- ing test for autonomous cortisol secretion in adrenal incidentalo- mas: a prospective study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(5): e1789-e1796. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgac072
218. Carafone LE, Zhang CD, Li D, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of dehy- droepiandrosterone sulfate and corticotropin in autonomous cor- tisol secretion. Biomedicines. 2021;9(7):741. https://doi.org/10. 3390/biomedicines9070741
219. Puvaneswaralingam S, Kjellbom A, Lindgren O, Londahl M, Olsen H. ACTH Following overnight dexamethasone suppression can be used in the verification of autonomous cortisol secretion in patients with adrenal incidentalomas. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2021;94(2):168-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.14357
220. Reimondo G, Allasino B, Bovio S, et al. Pros and cons of dexa- methasone suppression test for screening of subclinical Cushing’s syndrome in patients with adrenal incidentalomas. J Endocrinol Invest. 2011;34(1):e1-e5. https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF03346701
221. Elamin MB, Murad MH, Mullan R, et al. Accuracy of diagnostic tests for Cushing’s syndrome: a systematic review and metaanaly- ses. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008;93(5):1553-1562. https://doi. org/10.1210/jc.2008-0139
222. Ueland GA, Methlie P, Kellmann R, et al. Simultaneous assay of cortisol and dexamethasone improved diagnostic accuracy of the dexamethasone suppression test. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;176(6): 705-713. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-17-0078
223. Vogg N, Kurlbaum M, Deutschbein T, Grasl B, Fassnacht M, Kroiss M. Method-specific cortisol and dexamethasone thresholds increase clinical specificity of the dexamethasone suppression test for Cushing syndrome. Clin Chem. 2021;67(7):998-1007. https:// doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/hvab056
224. Genere N, Kaur RJ, Athimulam S, et al. Interpretation of abnor- mal dexamethasone suppression test is enhanced with use of syn- chronous free cortisol assessment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(3):e1221-e1230. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/ dgab724
225. Terzolo M, Bovio S, Reimondo G, et al. Subclinical Cushing’s syn- drome in adrenal incidentalomas. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2005;34(2):423-439, x. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecl.2005. 01.008
226. Tauchmanova L, Rossi R, Biondi B, et al. Patients with subclinical Cushing’s syndrome due to adrenal adenoma have increased car- diovascular risk. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87(11): 4872-4878. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2001-011766
227. Emral R, Uysal AR, Asik M, et al. Prevalence of subclinical Cushing’s syndrome in 70 patients with adrenal incidentaloma: clinical, biochemical and surgical outcomes. Endocr J. 2003;50(4):399-408. https://doi.org/10.1507/endocrj.50.399
228. Reincke M, Fassnacht M, Vath S, Mora P, Allolio B. Adrenal inci- dentalomas: a manifestation of the metabolic syndrome? Endocr Res. 1996;22(4):757-761. https://doi.org/10.1080/0743580960 9043773
229. Bernini G, Moretti A, Iacconi P, et al. Anthropometric, haemo- dynamic, humoral and hormonal evaluation in patients with inci- dental adrenocortical adenomas before and after surgery. Eur J Endocrinol. 2003;148:213-219. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.0. 1480213
230. Fernandez-Real JM, Engel WR, Simo R, Salinas I, Webb SM. Study of glucose tolerance in consecutive patients harbouring inci- dental adrenal tumours. Study group of incidental adrenal aden- oma. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1998;49(1):53-61. https://doi.org/ 10.1046/j.1365-2265.1998.00437.x
231. Morelli V, Masserini B, Salcuni AS, et al. Subclinical hypercortis- olism: correlation between biochemical diagnostic criteria and clinical aspects. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2010;73:161-166.
232. Rossi R, Tauchmanova L, Luciano A, et al. Subclinical Cushing’s syndrome in patients with adrenal incidentaloma: clinical and bio- chemical features. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000;85:1440-1448.
233. Hadjidakis D, Tsagarakis S, Roboti C, et al. Does subclinical hy- percortisolism adversely affect the bone mineral density of patients with adrenal incidentalomas? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2003;58(1): 72-77. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.2003.01676.x
234. Vinolas H, Grouthier V, Mehsen-Cetre N, et al. Assessment of ver- tebral microarchitecture in overt and mild Cushing’s syndrome us- ing trabecular bone score. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2018;89(2): 148-154. https://doi.org/10.1111/cen.13743
235. Hardy RS, Zhou H, Seibel MJ, Cooper MS. Glucocorticoids and bone: consequences of endogenous and exogenous excess and re- placement therapy. Endocr Rev. 2018;39(5):519-548. https:// doi.org/10.1210/er.2018-00097
236. Moraes AB, de Paula MP, de Paula Paranhos-Neto F, et al. Bone evaluation by high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed
tomography in patients with adrenal incidentaloma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(8):dgaa263. https://doi.org/10. 1210/clinem/dgaa263
237. Kjellbom A, Lindgren O, Danielsson M, Olsen H, Londahl M. Mortality not increased in patients with non-functional adrenal adenomas: a matched cohort study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgad074
238. Buitenwerf E, Korteweg T, Visser A, et al. Unenhanced CT im- aging is highly sensitive to exclude pheochromocytoma: a multi- center study. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;178(5):431-437. https:// doi.org/10.1530/EJE-18-0006
239. Canu L, Van Hemert JAW, Kerstens MN, et al. CT characteristics of pheochromocytoma: relevance for the evaluation of adrenal in- cidentaloma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(2):312-318. https:/doi.org/10.1210/jc.2018-01532
240. Mulatero P, Monticone S, Deinum J, et al. Genetics, prevalence, screening and confirmation of primary aldosteronism: a position statement and consensus of the working group on endocrine hypertension of the European society of hypertension. J Hypertens. 2020;38(10):1919-1928. https://doi.org/10.1097/ HJH.0000000000002510
241. Mulatero P, Sechi LA, Williams TA, et al. Subtype diagnosis, treat- ment, complications and outcomes of primary aldosteronism and future direction of research: a position statement and consensus of the working group on endocrine hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens. 2020;38(10):1929-1936. https:/doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000002520
242. Reincke M, Bancos I, Mulatero P, Scholl UI, Stowasser M, Williams TA. Diagnosis and treatment of primary aldosteronism. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9(12):876-892. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00210-2
243. Mulatero P, Bertello C, Veglio F, Monticone S. Approach to the patient on antihypertensive therapy: screen for primary aldoster- onism. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107:3175-3181 . https:/ doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgac460
244. Vaidya A, Hundemer GL, Nanba K, Parksook WW, Brown JM. Primary aldosteronism: state-of-the-art review. Am J Hypertens. 2022;35:967-988 . https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpac079
245. Park HS, Roman SA, Sosa JA. Outcomes from 3144 adrenalecto- mies in the United States: which matters more, surgeon volume or specialty? Arch Surg. 2009;144(11):1060-1067. https://doi.org/ 10.1001/archsurg.2009.191
246. Kerkhofs TM, Verhoeven RH, Bonjer HJ, et al. Surgery for adre- nocortical carcinoma in The Netherlands: analysis of the national cancer registry data. Eur J Endocrinol. 2013;169(1):83-89. https:/ doi.org/10.1530/EJE-13-0142
247. Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, Boniardi M, et al. Adrenocortical car- cinoma: effect of hospital volume on patient outcome. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012;397(2):201-207. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00423-011-0866-8
248. Anderson KL Jr., Thomas SM, Adam MA, et al. Each procedure matters: threshold for surgeon volume to minimize complications and decrease cost associated with adrenalectomy. Surgery. 2018;163(1):157-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2017.04. 028
249. Rahbari R, Alavi M, Alvarez JF, et al. Volume matters: longitudin- al retrospective cohort study of outcomes following consultation and standardization of adrenal surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28(13):8849-8860. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021- 10297-3
250. Hue JJ, Bingmer K, Zhao H, et al. Reassessing the impact of tumor size on operative approach in adrenocortical carcinoma. J Surg Oncol. 2021;123(5):1238-1245. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso. 26418
251. Reibetanz J, Jurowich C, Erdogan I, et al. Impact of lymphadenec- tomy on the oncologic outcome of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2012;255(2):363-369. https://doi.org/10. 1097/SLA.0b013e3182367ac3
252. Tseng J, DiPeri T, Chen Y, et al. Adrenocortical carcinoma: the value of lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29(3): 1965-1970. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-11051-5
253. Hendricks A, Muller S, Fassnacht M, et al. Impact of lymphade- nectomy on the oncologic outcome of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(2):291.
254. Morelli L, Tartaglia D, Bronzoni J, et al. Robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic surgery of the adrenal glands: a case-control study comparing surgical techniques. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2016;401(7):999-1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-016- 1494-0
255. Vatansever S, Nordenstrom E, Raffaelli M, Brunaud L, Makay O. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy: results from the EUROCRINE surgical registry. Surgery. 2022;171(5):1224-1230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.12. 003
256. Gaujoux S, Mihai R. European Society of Endocrine Surgeons (ESES) and European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumours (ENSAT) recommendations for the surgical manage- ment of adrenocortical carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2017;104(4): 358-376. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10414
257. Fassnacht M, Dekkers OM, Else T, et al. European Society of Endocrinology clinical practice guidelines on the management of adrenocortical carcinoma in adults, in collaboration with the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumors. Eur J Endocrinol. 2018;179(4):G1-G46. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE- 18-0608
258. Fassnacht M, Assie G, Baudin E, et al. Adrenocortical carcinomas and malignant phaeochromocytomas: ESMO-EURACAN clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2020;31(11):1476-1490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc. 2020.08.2099
259. Di Dalmazi G, Berr CM, Fassnacht M, Beuschlein F, Reincke M. Adrenal function after adrenalectomy for subclinical hypercortis- olism and Cushing’s syndrome: a systematic review of the litera- ture. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2014;99(8):2637-2645. https:/ doi.org/10.1210/jc.2014-1401
260. Eller-Vainicher C, Morelli V, Salcuni AS, et al. Accuracy of several parameters of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis activity in pre- dicting before surgery the metabolic effects of the removal of an adrenal incidentaloma. Eur J Endocrinol. 2010;163(6):925-935. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-10-0602
261. Olsen H, Kjellbom A, Londahl M, Lindgren O. Suppressed ACTH is frequently unrelated to autonomous cortisol secretion in pa- tients with adrenal incidentalomas. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019;104(2):506-512. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2018-01029
262. Bornstein SR, Allolio B, Arlt W, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of primary adrenal insufficiency: an endocrine society clinical prac- tice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2016;101(2):364-389. https:/doi.org/10.1210/jc.2015-1710
263. He X, Findling JW, Auchus RJ. Glucocorticoid withdrawal syn- drome following treatment of endogenous Cushing syndrome. Pituitary. 2022;25(3):393-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11102- 022-01218-y
264. Theiler-Schwetz V, Prete A. Glucocorticoid withdrawal syndrome: what to expect and how to manage. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2023;30(3):167-174. https://doi.org/10.1097/ MED.0000000000000804
265. Terzolo M, Stigliano A, Chiodini I, et al. AME Position statement on adrenal incidentaloma. Eur J Endocrinol. 2011;164(6): 851-870. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-10-1147
266. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evalu- ation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ejca.2008.10.026
267. Nogueira TM, Lirov R, Caoili EM, et al. Radiographic character- istics of adrenal masses preceding the diagnosis of adrenocortical
cancer. Horm Cancer. 2015;6(4):176-181. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s12672-015-0225-2
268. Ozsari L, Kutahyalioglu M, Elsayes KM, et al. Preexisting adrenal masses in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma: clinical and radiological factors contributing to delayed diagnosis. Endocrine. 2015;51(2):351-359.
269. Speiser PW, Arlt W, Auchus RJ, et al. Congenital adrenal hyper- plasia due to steroid 21-hydroxylase deficiency: an endocrine soci- ety clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(11):4043-4088. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2018-01865
270. Del Monte P, Bernasconi D, Bertolazzi L, et al. Increased 17 alpha- hydroxyprogesterone response to ACTH in silent adrenal aden- oma: cause or effect? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 1995;42(3): 273-277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.1995.tb01875.x
271. Patocs A, Toth M, Barta C, et al. Hormonal evaluation and muta- tion screening for steroid 21-hydroxylase deficiency in patients with unilateral and bilateral adrenal incidentalomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 2002;147:349-355. https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.0. 1470349
272. Bouys L, Vaczlavik A, Jouinot A, et al. Identification of predictive criteria for pathogenic variants of primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia (PBMAH) gene ARMC5 in 352 unselected pa- tients. Eur J Endocrinol. 2022;187(1):123-134. https://doi.org/10. 1530/EJE-21-1032
273. Bertherat J, Bourdeau I, Bouys L, Chasseloup F, Kamenicky P, Lacroix A. Clinical, pathophysiologic, genetic and therapeutic progress in primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia. Endocr Rev. 2022:bnac034. https://doi.org/10.1210/endrev/ bnac034
274. Debillon E, Velayoudom-Cephise FL, Salenave S, et al. Unilateral adrenalectomy as a first-line treatment of Cushing’s syndrome in patients with primary bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(12):4417-4424. https://doi. org/10.1210/jc.2015-2662
275. Young WF, du Plessis H, Thompson GB, et al. The clinical conun- drum of corticotropin-independent autonomous cortisol secretion in patients with bilateral adrenal masses. World J Surg. 2008;32(5):856-862. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9332-8
276. Ueland GA, Methlie P, Jossang DE, et al. Adrenal venous sampling for assessment of autonomous cortisol secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018;103(12):4553-4560. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc. 2018-01198
277. Johnson PC, Thompson SM, Adamo D, et al. Adrenal venous sam- pling for lateralization of cortisol hypersecretion in patients with bi- lateral adrenal masses. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2022;98(2):177-189.
278. Vassiliadi DA, Ntali G, Vicha E, Tsagarakis S. High prevalence of sub- clinical hypercortisolism in patients with bilateral adrenal incidentalo- mas: a challenge to management. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf. 2011;74(4): 438-444. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.2010.03963.x
279. Vassiliadi DA, Ntali G, Stratigou T, Adali M, Tsagarakis S. Aberrant cortisol responses to physiological stimuli in patients presenting with bilateral adrenal incidentalomas. Endocrine. 2011;40(3):437-444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-011-9490-1
280. Bourdeau I, D’Amour P, Hamet P, Boutin JM, Lacroix A. Aberrant membrane hormone receptors in incidentally discovered bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia with subclinical Cushing’s syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2001;86: 5534-5540.
281. Lacroix A, Bourdeau I, Lampron A, Mazzuco TL, Tremblay J, Hamet P. Aberrant G-protein coupled receptor expression in rela- tion to adrenocortical overfunction. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2010;73:1-15.
282. Lacroix A, Baldacchino V, Bourdeau I, Hamet P, Tremblay J. Cushing’s syndrome variants secondary to aberrant hormone re- ceptors. Trends Endocrinol Metab. 2004;15(8):375-382. https:/ doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2004.08.007
283. Lacroix A, Ndiaye N, Tremblay J, Hamet P. Ectopic and abnormal hormone receptors in adrenal Cushing’s syndrome. Endocr Rev. 2001;22:75-110.
284. Libe R, Coste J, Guignat L, et al. Aberrant cortisol regulations in bilateral macronodular adrenal hyperplasia: a frequent finding in a prospective study of 32 patients with overt or subclinical Cushing’s syndrome. Eur J Endocrinol. 2010;163(1):129-138. https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-10-0195
285. Castinetti F, Taieb D, Henry JF, et al. MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: outcome of adrenal sparing surgery in heritable pheochromocytoma. Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;174(1): R9-18.
286. Neumann HPH, Tsoy U, Bancos I, et al. Comparison of pheochromocytoma-specific morbidity and mortality among adults with bilateral pheochromocytomas undergoing total adre- nalectomy vs cortical-sparing adrenalectomy. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(8):e198898. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetwork open.2019.8898
287. Davenport C, Liew A, Doherty B, et al. The prevalence of adrenal incidentaloma in routine clinical practice. Endocrine. 2011;40(1): 80-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-011-9445-6
288. Mannelli M, Dralle H, Lenders JW. Perioperative management of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma: is there a state of the art? Horm Metab Res. 2012;44(5):373-378. https://doi.org/10.1055/ s-0032-1306275
289. Stolk RF, Bakx C, Mulder J, Timmers HJ, Lenders JW. Is the ex- cess cardiovascular morbidity in pheochromocytoma related to blood pressure or to catecholamines? J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(3):1100-1106. https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2012-3669
290. Kunikowska J, Matyskiel R, Toutounchi S, Grabowska-Derlatka L, Koperski L, Krolicki L. What parameters from 18F-FDG PET/CT are useful in evaluation of adrenal lesions? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41(12):2273-2280. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s00259-014-2844-1
291. Villar Del Moral JM, Munoz Perez N, Rodriguez Fernandez A, et al. [Diagnostic efficacy and discriminatory capacity of positron emission tomography combined with axial tomography of adrenal lesions]. Cir Esp. 2010;88(4):247-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ciresp.2010.07.007