Long-term pituitary function and functional and patient-reported outcomes in severe acquired brain injury

Abstract

Abstract Objective Assessment of posttraumatic hypothalamic–pituitary dysfunctions is expected to be the most relevant assessment to offer patients with severe intracranial affection. In this study, we aim to investigate the prevalence of hypopituitarism in patients with severe acquired traumatic brain injury (TBI) compared with nontraumatic brain injury (NTBI) and to relate pituitary insufficiency to functional and patient-reported outcomes. Design This is a prospective study. Methods We included patients admitted for inpatient neurorehabilitation after severe TBI (N = 42) and NTBI (N = 18). The patients underwent a pituitary function assessment at a mean of 2.4 years after the injury. Functional outcome was assessed by using Functional Independence Measure and Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (both 1 year after discharge from neurorehabilitation) and patient-reported outcome was assessed by using Multiple Fatigue Inventory-20 and EQ-5D-3L. Results Hypopituitarism was reported in 10/42 (24%) patients with TBI and 7/18 (39%) patients with NTBI (P = .23). Insufficiencies affected 1 axis in 14/17 (82%) patients (13 hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and 1 growth hormone [GH] deficiency) and 2 axes in 3/17 (18%) patients (1 hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and GH deficiency, and 2 hypogonadotropic hypogonadism and arginin vasopressin deficiency). None had central hypoadrenalism or central hypothyroidism. In patients with both TBI and NTBI, pituitary status was unrelated to functioning and ability scores at 1 year and to patient-reported outcome scores at a mean of 2.4 years after the injury. Conclusion Patients with severe acquired brain injury may develop long-term hypothalamus–pituitary insufficiency, with an equal occurrence in patients with TBI and NTBI. In both types of patients, mainly isolated deficiencies, most commonly affecting the gonadal axis, were seen. Insufficiencies were unrelated to functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, probably reflecting the complexity and heterogeneous manifestations in both patient groups.