Stringent criteria have been established to define remission by hormone parameters in several endocrine disorders. An example is provided by the criteria for cure of acromegaly (1). However, it is clear that such criteria are far from being comprehensive of a patient status, and often there is a need for filling a gap between the “hard data” of laboratory results and imaging findings on one hand, and the “soft information” related to the patient presentation and complaints on the other hand. Indeed, long-standing endocrine disorders may imply a degree of irreversibility of the pathological process and induce highly individualized affective responses based on each patient’s psychological assets and liabilities. In recent years, there has been increasing awareness of the unsatisfactory degree of remission that current therapeutic strategies entail in a variety of endocrine disorders. Studies concerned with psychological well-being, functional capacity, and social and interpersonal components of illness have provided new insights in clinical endocrinology (2–4). Psychiatric disturbances and impaired quality of life, which were present in the acute phase of illness, are often found to improve upon normalization of hormonal parameters (2, 3). However, disappearance of psychiatric symptoms and amelioration of quality of life are not always the case. This has been observed in several studies concerned with patients with either pituitary disease (acromegaly, Cushing’s disease, hyperprolactinemia, nonfunctioning pituitary adenomas, hypopituitarism, and GH deficiency) or nonpituitary endocrine disorders (thyroid disturbances, primary hyperparathyroidism, primary aldosteronism, adrenocortical insufficiency, and polycystic ovary syndrome) (2). There may be different reasons for a delayed or impaired process of recovery. Hormonal alterations are frequently associated with affective disturbances, which do not always remit upon normalization of blood parameters. Hormone replacement may not fully restore optimal endocrine balance, and subtle dysfunctions may still exert their influence on psychological states. This has been observed particularly in hypopituitarism ensuing from the treatment of pituitary disease (2–4). When surgery is performed (e.g. pituitary microadenomectomy in Cushing’s disease), the patient is likely to have expectations of a quick recovery toward his/her former normal condition. Unrealistic hopes of “cure” may foster discouragement and apathy. Harvey Cushing himself had acknowledged the difficult recovery of patients suffering from pituitary disease: “It is even more common for a physician or surgeon to eradicate or otherwise treat the obvious focus of disease, with more or less success, and to leave the mushroom of psychic deviations to vex and confuse the patient for long afterwards, if not actually to imbalance him” (5). Currently, however, the average endocrinologist is still unfamiliar with the psychosocial aspects of patient care, both in terms of personal skills and organizational structure, and lacks an adequate background for facilitating the process of recovery. The customary taxonomy does not include patterns of symptoms, severity of illness, effects of comorbid conditions, timing of phenomena, rate of progression of illness, functional capacity, and other clinical features that demarcate major prognostic and therapeutic differences among patients who otherwise seem deceptively similar because they have the same diagnosis and
Read full abstract