Talk:Pituitary apoplexy

UK guidelines
10.1111/j.1365-2265.2010.03913.x JFW &#124; T@lk  16:35, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * The British medical press has now carried several editorials discussing these guidelines (10.1136/bmj.d1270 in the BMJ, 10.1136/emj.2010.106898 in EMJ). Let's hope that this will increase the pickup rate. JFW &#124; T@lk  19:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

For the Record
I came here to nitpick and copy edit for the SOLE purpose of irritating Dr. Wolff.

Further, affiant sayeth not.

Cliff Knickerbocker, M.S. (&#91;&#91;User talk:Uploadvirus&#124;talk&#93;&#93;) (talk) 12:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * No worries, that content got replaced with actual proper prose. JFW &#124; T@lk  13:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

More
an older case series, not technically a WP:MEDRS. JFW &#124; T@lk  13:06, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

And still more

 * 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283319061 (Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2009)
 * 10.1007/s00701-009-0595-8 (Acta Neurochir 2010) - other patterns of visual loss discussed (review of the 186 cases reported so far)
 * 10.1590/S0004-282X2009000200033 (Arq Neuropsiq 2009)
 * 10.3949/ccjm.75.11.793 (Cleve Clin J Med 2008, about pituitary incidentalomas, discusses risk of bleeding, also some hard data in the more recent 10.1210/jc.2010-1054)
 * 10.1177/0885066607312992 (J Intensive Care Med 2008)

Should probably stop there. JFW &#124; T@lk  14:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I've now incorporated the main reviews. This is a chapter in ISBN 1-58829-922-8 (Diagnosis and management of pituitary disorders, 2008), which covers the same material and adds very little to the current material. Other sources on Google Books are hard to access, but I will keep on looking. JFW &#124; T@lk  19:35, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Gratuitous feedback
Hmmm, not bad. What can I nitpick........(pause)
 * (snaps fingers) I know! Why is it called "Pituitary apoplexy"? If there is anything in the original (primary) source that is not in the secondaries, I'd cite and add. I think completeness in this aspect trumps strict limitation to secondary sources.


 * Also avoid repeating words in consecutive sentences e.g. " Larger tumors are more prone to hemorrhage" - can we say " Larger tumors are more prone to bleed"?


 * ditto The majority of cases (60–80%) are not precipitated by a particular cause. In the remainder, a number of precipitating causes...


 * does look a bit odd with only nine references....

More as I go. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I might need to dig up the original report from the 1950s in which the term was coined. JFW &#124; T@lk  16:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * There will still be further references added (a small list above). I still need to add more data from the JICM article, which is quite comprehensive. I don't expect there to be many more than 15 references, because this is a rare condition, and the number of WP:MEDRS is not enormous. JFW &#124; T@lk  08:45, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Image in the lead
Could use a lead image. Here is a nice one. We could see about someone creating a Netter like image specifically in the left upper corner. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Literature
I am only aware of one mention of the condition in the general literature. It is in Saturday by Ian McEwan (ISBN 0224072994), where the protagonist meets his future wife when she presents to him with the symptoms of a pituitary apoplexy. JFW &#124; T@lk  10:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Percival Bailey
Some sources maintain that the Bailey who co-authored Dott, Bailey and Cushing's 1925 monograph was the same as the Pearce Bailey who initially described pituitary apoplexy in 1898. This is probably not correct - in the paper ( 10.1002/bjs.1800135009) the second author is "Percival Bailey" working in Boston, a place where Pierce Bailey never worked. JFW &#124; T@lk  20:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Endocrine Reviews
10.1210/er.2015-1042 - likely to be useful for an update JFW &#124; T@lk  09:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC)