The clinical course of patients with malignant PPGL is remarkably variable. Rapid disease progression is associated with male sex, older age at diagnosis, synchronous metastases, larger tumor size, elevated dopamine, and not undergoing resection of primary tumor. An individualized approach to patients with metastatic PPGL is warranted.

Thyroid nodules are common. The clinical importance of thyroid nodules is related to excluding malignancy (4.0 to 6.5% of all thyroid nodules), evaluate their functional status and assess for the presence of pressure symptoms. Incidental thyroid nodules are being diagnosed with increasing frequency in the recent years with the use of newer and highly sensitive imaging techniques. The high prevalence of thyroid nodules necessitates that the clinicians use evidence-based approaches for their assessment and management. New molecular tests have been developed to help with evaluation of malignancy in thyroid nodules. This review addresses advances in thyroid nodule evaluation, and their management considering the current guidelines and supporting evidence.

Objective: To perform a systematic review of published literature on adrenal biopsy and to assess its performance in diagnosing adrenal malignancy. Methods: Medline In-Process and Other non-Indexed citations, MEDLInE, EMBAsE, and cochrane central Register of controlled Trial were searched from inception to february 2016. Reviewers extracted data and assessed methodological quality in duplicate. Results: We included 32 observational studies reporting on 2174 patients (39.4% women, mean age 59.8 years) undergoing 2190 adrenal mass biopsy procedures. Pathology was described in 1621/2190 adrenal lesions (689 metastases, 68 adrenocortical carcinomas, 64 other malignancies, 464 adenomas, 226 other benign, 36 pheochromocytomas, and 74 others). The pooled non-diagnostic rate (30 studies, 2013 adrenal biopsies) was 8.7% (95%cI: 6-11%). The pooled complication rate (25 studies, 1339 biopsies) was 2.5% (95%cI: 1.5-3.4%). studies were at a moderate risk for bias. Most limitations related to patient selection, assessment of outcome, and adequacy of follow-up. Only eight studies (240 patients) could be included in the diagnostic performance analysis with a sensitivity and specificity of 87 and 100% for malignancy, 70 and 98% for adrenocortical carcinoma, and 87 and 96% for metastasis respectively. Conclusions: Evidence based on small sample size and moderate risk of bias suggests that adrenal biopsy appears to be most useful in the diagnosis of adrenal metastasis in patients with a history of extra-adrenal malignancy. Adrenal biopsy should only be performed if the expected findings are likely to alter the management of the individual patient and after biochemical exclusion of catecholamine-producing tumors to help prevent potentially life-threatening complications.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a collaborative process by which patients and clinicians work together in a deliberative dialogue. The purpose of this dialogue is to identify reasonable management options that best fit and addresses the unique situation of the patient. SDM supports the patient-centered translation of research into practice. SDM also helps implement a core principle of evidence-based medicine: evidence is necessary but never sufficient to make a clinical decision, as consideration of patient values and context is also required. SDM conversations build on a partnership between the patient and the clinician, draw on the body of evidence with regard to the different treatment options, and consider options in light of the values, preferences, and context of the patient. SDM is appropriate for diabetes care because diabetes care often requires consideration of management options that differ in ways that matter to patients, such as the way in which they place significant demands on patient's life and living. In the last decade, SDM has proven feasible and useful for sharing evidence with patients and for involving patients in making decisions with their clinicians. Health care and clinical policies advocate SDM, but these policies have yet to impact diabetes care. In this paper, we describe what SDM is, its known impact on diabetes care, and needed work to implement this patient-centered approach in the care of the millions of patients with diabetes.

The relative efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily injections in individuals with type 1 diabetes is unclear. We sought to synthesize the existing evidence about the effect of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion on glycosylated hemoglobin, hypoglycemic events, and time spent in hypoglycemia compared to multiple daily injections. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus from January 2008 through November 2015 for randomized controlled trials that enrolled children or adults with type 1 diabetes. Trials identified in a previous systematic review and published prior to 2008 were also included. We included 25 randomized controlled trials at moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin in patients treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared to multiple daily injections (mean difference 0.37; 95 % confidence interval, 0.24-0.51). This effect was demonstrated in both children and adults. There was no significant difference in minor or severe hypoglycemic events. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion was associated with lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia. There was no significant difference in the time spent in hypoglycemia. In children and adults with type 1 diabetes and compared to multiple daily injections, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is associated with a modest reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin. There was no difference in severe or minor hypoglycemia, but likely a lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemia with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

No abstract

No abstract

People with diabetes often live with other chronic conditions and lead complicated lives. Determining what is the best management decision for a patient requires consideration of each individual's personal, social and biomedical context, what he or she values, the reasons he or she has to value the available options, and the relative contribution of each option in terms of benefits, harms, costs and inconveniences. Empathic conversations between patients and clinicians to diagnose the patient situation that necessitates action and the range of evidence-based actions that best address the situation, so-called shared decision-making, are essential to the personalized care of people with diabetes. The aim of the present review was to present key elements of shared decision-making and propose three different approaches for its application. The first approach focuses on transferring information to patients so that they can make decisions. The second approach, choice, focuses on cultivating the individual's ability to give voice to which choice is best for them. The third approach, conversation, establishes an empathic conversational environment through which the individual with diabetes and their clinician think and talk through how to address the problems of living with diabetes and related illnesses. These approaches are manifest in the design of evidence-based decision aids created to support shared decision-making. In randomized trials, decision aids can efficiently improve patient's knowledge, satisfaction, risk awareness, decisional conflict and involvement. Further research, however, is needed to better understand when and how to promote the empathic conversations, patient, clinician and service and policy contexts necessary to routinely implement shared decision-making in different at scale healthcare systems. In the interim, sufficient evidence and tools exist for persons with diabetes and their clinicians to gain expertise in making decisions together.