The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 84, No. 7 2408-2413
Copyright © 1999 by The Endocrine Society
Growth Hormone Deficiency with Ectopic Neurohypophysis: Anatomical Variations and Relationship between the Visibility of the Pituitary Stalk Asserted by Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Anterior Pituitary Function
Stéphanie Chen,
Juliane Léger,
Catherine Garel,
Max Hassan and
Paul Czernichow
Pediatric Endocrinology-Diabetology, and Radiology (C.G., M.H.)
Units, Hôpital Robert Debré, 75019 Paris, France
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Juliane Leger, M.D., Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes Unit, Hôpital Robert Debré, 48 boulevard Sérurier, 75019 Paris, France.
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
In GH-deficient children showing ectopic posterior pituitary
hyperintense signal (EPP), the anatomical details of the
pituitary-hypothalamic region and the relationship between the
visibility of the pituitary stalk and anterior pituitary function were
studied by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The absence or presence of
the pituitary stalk was recorded by MRI before and after the injection
of gadolinium in 25 children with GH deficiency and EPP at the age of
8.7 ± 5.0 yr (16 males and 9 females). Patients were classified
into 2 groups according to the presence (group 1; n = 14), or the
absence (group 2; n = 11) of pituitary stalk visibility after
gadolinium injection. Most patients in group 1 (12 of 14) demonstrated
isolated GH deficiency, whereas all but 1 patient in group 2 showed
multiple anterior pituitary hormone deficiency. The prevalence of a
normally sized adenohypophysis was higher in group 1 than in group 2
(50% vs. 9%; P < 0.05). Although
the EPP was found at the median eminence in all group 2 patients, it
was visualized in group 1 at different levels of the pituitary stalk in
60% of cases (8 of 14; at the proximal end of the pituitary stalk,
n = 4; in the middle of the pituitary stalk, n = 2; at the
distal end of the pituitary stalk, n = 2). This demonstrates that
the ectopic posterior pituitary migration abnormality may be complete
or partial.
In conclusion, although the pathogenesis of GH deficiency with
EPP remains unclear, these results suggest that in cases of GH
deficiency associated with ectopic posterior pituitary hyperintense
signal, patients with no visible pituitary stalk on MRI after
gadolinium injection present a more severe form of the disease in
childhood associated with multiple anterior pituitary hormone
deficiency, whereas visibility of the pituitary stalk is related to
isolated GH deficiency. Nevertheless, careful follow-up of these latter
patients is necessary, as the natural history of the disease is not
established until adulthood.
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
ECTOPIC posterior pituitary hyperintense
signal (EPP) is a marker of the so-called pituitary stalk transection
syndrome, which was described after the introduction of magnetic
resonance imaging (MRI). This syndrome is also characterized by the
absence of pituitary stalk visibility and hypoplasia of the anterior
hypophysis (1, 2). EPP may also be associated with a visible pituitary
stalk (3). It has been shown that the sensitivity of MRI for
visualizing the pituitary stalk is increased by gadolinium injection
and that the presence of an extremely thin pituitary stalk cannot be
definitely excluded without enhancement (4, 5).
Clinical data concerning this syndrome are limited, and it has been
shown to be associated with either isolated GH deficiency (IGHD) or
multiple anterior pituitary hormone deficiency (MPHD), but normal
posterior pituitary function (6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Previous studies have suggested
that MPHD is more frequent in cases showing EPP in association with the
absence of pituitary stalk visibility, whereas IGHD is more common in
cases showing EPP associated with visible pituitary stalk (3, 4, 5, 10, 11).
This study was therefore undertaken to 1) carefully investigate the
anatomy of the pituitary hypothalamic region in a large group of GHD
patients with EPP by MRI using gadolinium injection and 2) correlate
the presence or the absence of visibility of the pituitary stalk with
anterior pituitary function.
 |
Subjects and Methods
|
|---|
All 25 children studied were selected from a large group of
patients with GH deficiency (GHD) as having an ectopic hyperintense
signal of the neurohypophysis on MRI. At the time of diagnosis, their
mean chronological age was 4.9 ± 3.6 yr (from 0.111.8 yr; 9
females and 16 males) with a mean height of -2.9 ± 1.5
SD score and a mean height velocity of -2.5 ± 1.4
SD score. The mean bone age retardation over chronological
age was 1.7 ± 1.2 yr. MRI evaluation was performed at the age of
8.7 ± 5.0 yr (range, 0.917.4 yr). Patients were 9.6 ± 4.8
yr old (range, 117.4 yr) at the last evaluation.
GHD was established by a GH peak of less than 10 ng/mL after two
pharmacological tests. Complete evaluation of the other anterior
pituitary functions was performed in all of the patients at diagnosis
and was repeated during the follow-up if deemed necessary from clinical
examination. TSH deficiency was diagnosed by a plasma T4
level below 10 pmol/L and/or abnormal TSH stimulation after TRH
administration (normal values for TSH were, respectively, 0.56,
14 ± 7, and <8 mU/L for basal, peak, and 120 min post-TRH
administration). ACTH deficiency was diagnosed by morning basal plasma
cortisol values below 60 ng/mL and below 150 ng/mL during
insulin-induced hypoglycemia. When the morning cortisol value was
higher than 100 ng/mL, the corticotropin reserve was not systematically
evaluated. Hyperprolactinemia was defined as basal plasma PRL levels
above 25 ng/mL. Evaluation of the pituitary-gonadal axis was mainly
clinical. Patients were either prepubertal or considered nondeficient
when spontaneous pubertal development occurred. Gonadotropin deficiency
was suspected in patients who showed no pubertal development at a
normal pubertal age, and this was assessed by measurement of plasma sex
steroid levels and FSH and LH after GnRH treatment or after induced
puberty. Diabetes insipidus was excluded in all patients by a 12-h
water deprivation test.
MPHD was defined as GHD associated with abnormality of at least one of
the other anterior pituitary hormones.
All MRI readings (0.5 Tesla Magnet, Gyrex, Elscint, Haïfa,
Israël) were reviewed by the same investigator who was not
aware of the endocrinological data. Three-millimeter thick slices were
obtained on sagittal and coronal views of the pituitary area using a
gradient echo T1-weighted sequence (TR = 400, TE = 18,
= 90°), and axial slices of encephalus using a T2-weighted
sequence (fast spin echo TR = 4000, TE = 100) were made.
Gadolinium injection was performed in 23 of 25 patients, as the
pituitary stalk was visible without injection in 2 cases. The absence
or presence of the pituitary stalk was recorded before and after
gadolinium treatment as normal, absent, or thin. Patients were
classified into 2 groups according to the presence (group 1) or the
absence (group 2) of pituitary stalk visibility after gadolinium
injection.
The height and surface aspect of the anterior pituitary were recorded,
and its height was measured on a sagittal T1-weighted image,
perpendicular to the sella turcica base and was judged to be either
normal or small, according to previously published normative data in
children (12). The precise localization of EPP was also established by
MRI.
Associated brain abnormalities and adverse perinatal events, such as
breech or forceps delivery, caesarean, prematurity, or neonatal
distress (low Apgar score), and other associated malformations were
also recorded.
Statistical analysis
Results were expressed as the mean ± SD. The
Mann-Whitney U test was performed for comparison between groups. The
percentages within the two groups were compared by the
2
test.
 |
Results
|
|---|
Patients were classified into 2 groups (groups I and II) according
to the visibility of the pituitary stalk. As shown in Table 1
, the pituitary stalk was identified in
14 patients (group I). In 2 of the 14 patients, the pituitary stalk was
visible only after gadolinium injection. In 11 of the 14 cases, the
pituitary stalk was described as thin, and this was particularly true
for the 2 patients in whom the stalk was only visible after gadolinium
injection. In 11 patients (group II), the pituitary stalk was not
visible even after enhancement. The ectopic posterior hyperintense
signal was found at the median eminence level in all group II patients
and 6 of the 14 group I patients. Interestingly, the EPP was located at
various points along the pituitary stalk in the other 8 patients (60%)
of group I, at a lower proximal level of the pituitary stalk (n =
4), at the distal level of the pituitary stalk (n = 2; Fig. 1
), or in the middle of the pituitary
stalk (n = 2). The height of the adenohypophysis differed between
the 2 groups (3.3 ± 1.3 vs. 2.2 ± 1.7 mm for
groups I and II, respectively; P = 0.07), and when
correlated with age and pubertal status, the prevalence of anterior
pituitary hypoplasia was higher in group II than in group I patients
(91% vs. 50%; P < 0.05).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 1. Cerebral magnetic resonance imaging and endocrine
features in 25 patients with ectopic posterior pituitary hyperintense
signal (EPPHS) according to the presence (group I; n = 14) or the
absence (group II; n = 11) of a visible pituitary stalk
|
|

View larger version (135K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Cerebral MRI (T1-weighted images). a,
Sagittal slice; b, coronal slice: normal morphology of anterior
pituitary and pituitary stalk is seen. The hyperintense signal of the
posterior pituitary is in the normal location. The neurohypophysis is
not visible on the coronal slice because the slice is anterior to it.
c, Sagittal slice; d, coronal slice: a small anterior pituitary with no
visible pituitary stalk after gadolinium injection is seen. The ectopic
posterior pituitary hyperintense signal is at the median eminence
(arrow). e, Sagittal slice; f, coronal slice: a small
anterior pituitary with normal visibility of the pituitary stalk is
seen. The ectopic posterior pituitary hyperintense signal is at a
distal level of the pituitary stalk (arrow). The
cerebellar vermis is small (star). A posterior callosal
agenesis was found in this case (only the anterior part of the corpus
callosum is seen; arrowhead).
|
|
As shown in Tables 1
and 2
, most patients
in group I (12 of 14 cases) showed IGHD. Only 2 patients with a visible
pituitary stalk were found to have more than 1 anterior pituitary
hormone deficiency. In 1 of these 2 cases, the pituitary stalk was not
visible before gadolinium injection and was seen to be extremely thin
after enhancement. On the other hand, all but 1 patient in group II
showed MPHD.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 2. Clinical, endocrinological features and perinatal
events of the 25 GH-deficient patients with ectopic neurohypophysis
|
|
The severity of growth retardation was identical for the two groups.
Associated congenital brain abnormalities were found in eight patients;
some of them showed more than one malformation. These eight patients
were equally distributed between the two groups (29% in group I and
36% in group II). The malformations included midline abnormalities
(Arnold Chiari type I malformation, agenesis of corpus callosum,
cranio-pharyngeal canal) in 75% of the cases. Frequency of adverse
perinatal events was equally distributed between the two groups. Other
disorders were found in eight children, with the same frequency in both
groups. They included associated malformations other than cerebral,
some of which could be classified as midline abnormalities (n = 6;
such as palatine cleft, anus anteposition, interatrial septal defect,
persistent common atri-ventricular ostrium and single ventricle, nasal
pyriform aperture stenosis, and single median incisor); some of the
patients showed more than one abnormality. In group I, one patient
(patient 6) presented with a familial congenital form of GHD.
 |
Discussion
|
|---|
Our study demonstrated in a large group of children with GHD and
EPP that this anatomical abnormality may be associated in more than
half of the cases with a visible pituitary stalk. Although excellent
definition of the hypothalamic pituitary region is obtained with MRI,
gadolinium injection is necessary for a better description of the
stalk. In our series, two patients were classified in group I after
gadolinium injection only, because the stalk was not visible without
enhancement. In addition, the pituitary stalk was thin in several
patients, and although visible without injection, the characterization
was better after enhancement. Moreover, when the pituitary stalk was
visible, the adenohypophysis was hypoplasic in only 50% of cases, but
was hypoplasic in the vast majority of patients showing no visibility
of the pituitary stalk. This classification by careful imaging is
important because the pituitary anatomy and function were clearly
different in the two groups. Only two patients with a visible pituitary
stalk had MPHD, whereas it was the rule for most patients with no
pituitary stalk visibility. Thus visualized by MRI using
gadolinium, the pituitary stalk may be a sensitive marker of IGHD in
EPP, whereas its absence constitutes a predictive factor of MPHD. These
results are in accordance with those of previous studies that suggest,
in a limited group of GH-deficient children with EPP, a correlation
between anterior pituitary function and morphological anomalies of the
hypothalamic-pituitary region on MRI, with a functional prognostic
value of the visibility of the pituitary stalk (3, 4, 5, 10, 11). Although
MRI has been proved to be a helpful tool in the diagnosis and prognosis
of GHD (13, 14), the use of MRI with gadolinium injection has not been
mentioned in most previous reports of patients with pituitary stalk
transection syndrome (2, 7, 8, 9, 14), and consequently, it has been shown
that one third of these patients present IGHD (9). Therefore, these
data are not useful in correlating the status of the stalk with
anterior pituitary function.
Moreover, we have shown that in cases with a visible pituitary stalk,
the EPP is not always at the median eminence, but can be located at
different levels (proximal, middle, or distal level) of the pituitary
stalk, as was seen in 8 of the 14 group I patients (60% of cases).
Anatomical variations in the location of the high intensity signal of
the posterior pituitary seen on T1-weighted MRI may occur infrequently
(11, 15) and have to be differentiated from a stalk-located lipoma
(15, 16).
According to the present data, when the pituitary stalk is visible in
EPP cases, the malformation generally does not affect the
adenohypophysis and pituitary stalk. Whether this type of developmental
anomaly is due to associated vascular change (8, 9) only or to a
subtype of genetic defect (17) remains unclear. An ectopic posterior
pituitary could result from defective neural migration during
embryogenesis (7, 8, 10). The migration abnormality may be complete or
partial, which could explain why EPP can be located at different parts
of the stalk, as seen in some group I patients. This hypothesis of
abnormal embryonic development is supported by the presence in our
patients of associated midline structure malformations in both the
brain and the rest of the body or by the presence of other
malformations and/or a familial form of GHD (n = 1). Moreover,
adverse perinatal events are not found consistently in our study, and
the hypothesis of a traumatic origin during delivery for the syndrome
(1, 2, 6), although possible in some patients, is not unanimously
supported.
In conclusion, EPP represents an important marker of anterior pituitary
structure and function, and patients should be investigated with a
precise imaging technique. Those with the absence of pituitary stalk
visibility are afflicted with a more severe form of adenohypophysis
hypoplasia and with MPHD. These children need repeated reassessment of
pituitary function when MPHD is not demonstrated at the first
evaluation, as progression to complete anterior pituitary deficiency
may occur progressively, even during the second or the third decade of
life (4, 18). Those showing pituitary stalk visibility and IGHD during
childhood seem to have a better endocrinological prognosis.
Nevertheless, careful follow-up of these latter patients is also
necessary, as the natural history of the disease is not established
until adulthood. It should also be noted that this description results
from a cross-sectional approach at one given time point. It may be
that in some cases the pituitary stalk and adenohypophysis may undergo
a secondary atrophy. If this is the case, our description is valid at a
certain moment in the evolution of the disease, and groups I and II
would thus not represent different entities.
Several transcription factors are implicated in early pituitary
development and are involved in different developmental stages (17).
Inactivating mutations of the genes for pituitary-specific
transcription factor PIT 1 and Prophet of PIT 1 (PROP 1) have been
identified in humans with combined pituitary hormone deficiency (19).
We believe that in the near future a better knowledge of the different
transcription factors involved in pituitary development will elucidate
these profound abnormalities of the hypothalamo-pituitary axis.
Therefore, a more precise description of patient phenotypes will aid in
the future description of the disease at the molecular level.
Received January 25, 1999.
Revised April 1, 1999.
Accepted April 8, 1999.
 |
References
|
|---|
-
Fujisawa I, Kikuchi K, Nishimura K, et al. 1987 Transection of the pituitary stalk: Developpement of an ectopic
posterior lobe assessed with MR imaging. Radiology. 165:487489.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kelly WM, Kucharczyk W, Kucharczyk J, Kjos B, Peck WW,
Norman D, Newton TH. 1988 Posterior pituitary ectopia: an MR
feature of pituitary dwarfism. Am J Neuroradiol. 9:453460.[Abstract]
-
Ultmann MC, Siegel SF, Hirsch WL, Finegold DN, Foley Jr
TP. 1993 Pituitary stalk and ectopic hyperintense T1 signal on
magnetic resonance imaging: implications for anterior pituitary
dysfunction. Am J Dis Child. 147:647652.[Abstract]
-
Maghnie M, Genovese E, Villa A, Spagnolo L, Campani R,
Severi F. 1996 Dynamic MRI in the congenital agenesis of the
neural pituitary stalk syndrome: the role of the vascular pituitary
stalk in predicting residual anterior pituitary function. Clin
Endocrinol (Oxf). 45:281290.[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Genovese E, Maghnie M, Beluffi G, Villa A, Sammarchi L,
Severi F, Campani R. 1997 Hypothalamic-pituitary vascularization
in pituitary stalk transection syndrome: is the pituitary stalk really
transected? Pediatr Radiol. 27:4853.[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Kikuchi K, Fujisawa I, Momoi T, et al. 1988 Hypothalamic-pituitary function in growth hormone-deficient patients
with pituitary stalk transection. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 67:817823.[Abstract]
-
Triulzi F, Scotti G, Di Natale B, Pellini C, Lukezic M,
Scognamiglio M, Chiumello G. 1994 Evidence of a congenital midline
brain anomaly in pituitary dwarfs: a magnetic resonance imaging study
in 101 patients. Pediatrics. 93:409415.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Maghnie M, Triulzi F, Larizza D, Preti P, Priora C,
Scotti G, Severi F. 1991 Hypothalamic-pituitary dysfunction in
growth hormone-deficient patients with pituitary abnormalities. J
Clin Endocrinol Metab. 73:7983.[Abstract]
-
Pinto G, Netchine I, Sobrier ML, Brunelle F,
Souberbielle JC, Brauner R. 1997 Pituitary stalk interruption
syndrome: a clinical-biological-genetic assessment of its pathogenesis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 82:34503454.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Abrahams JJ, Trefelner E, Boulware SD. 1991 Idiopathic growth hormone deficiency: MR findings in 35 patients. Am J Neuroradiol. 12:155160.[Abstract]
-
Kornreich L, Horev G, Lazar L, Schwarz M, Sulkes J,
Pertzelan A. 1998 MR findings in growth hormone deficiency:
correlation with severity of hypopituitarism. Am J Neuroradiol. 19:14951499.[Abstract]
-
Argyropoulou M, Perignon F, Brunelle F, Brauner R,
Rappaport R. 1991 Height of normal pituitary gland as a function
of age evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging in children. Pediatr
Radiol. 21:247249.[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Bozzola M, Adamsbaum C, Biscaldi I, et al. 1996 Role of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis and prognosis of
growth hormone deficiency. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 45:2126.[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Hamilton J, Blaser S, Daneman D. 1998 MR imaging in
idiopathic growth hormone deficiency. Am J Neuroradiol. 19:16091615.[Abstract]
-
Brooks BS, El Gammal T, Allisson JD, Hoffman WH. 1989 Frequency and variation of the posterior pituitary bright signal
on MR Images. Am J Roentgenol. 10:943948.
-
Abrahams JJ. 1991 Ectopia of the posterior
pituitary gland or lipoma? Am J Neuroradiol. 12:579581.[Medline]
-
Rosenfeld MG, Bach I, Erkman L, et al. 1996 Transcriptional control of cell phenotypes in the neuroendocrine
system. Recent Prog Horm Res. 51:217238.
-
Crowne EC, Shalet SM. 1991 Adult panhypopituitarism
presenting as idiopathic growth hormone deficiency in childhood. Acta
Paediatr Scand. 80:255258.[Medline]
-
Procter AM, Phillips JA, Cooper DN. 1998 The
molecular genetics of growth hormone deficiency. Hum Genet. 103:255272.[CrossRef][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
F. Berkowitz, P.J. Lee, A.L. Martin, and M.M. Martin
Enlargement of the Proximal Pituitary Stalk Associated with Spontaneous Recovery from Multiple Pituitary Hormone Deficiencies
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol.,
September 1, 2008;
29(8):
1601 - 1602.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. A. van Tijn, J. J. M. de Vijlder, and T. Vulsma
Role of the Thyrotropin-Releasing Hormone Stimulation Test in Diagnosis of Congenital Central Hypothyroidism in Infants
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
February 1, 2008;
93(2):
410 - 419.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Gelwane, C. Garel, D. Chevenne, P. Armoogum, D. Simon, P. Czernichow, and J. Leger
Subnormal Serum Insulin-Like Growth Factor-I Levels in Young Adults with Childhood-Onset Nonacquired Growth Hormone (GH) Deficiency Who Recover Normal GH Secretion May Indicate Less Severe but Persistent Pituitary Failure
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
October 1, 2007;
92(10):
3788 - 3795.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. S. A. van der Linden and H. W. van Es
Case 112: Pituitary Stalk Transection Syndrome with Ectopic Posterior Pituitary Gland
Radiology,
May 1, 2007;
243(2):
594 - 597.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Ladjouze, S. Soskin, C. Garel, M. Jullien, C. Naud-Saudreau, G. Pinto, P. Czernichow, and J. Leger
GH deficiency with central precocious puberty: a new rare disorder associated with a developmental defect of the hypothalamic-pituitary area
Eur. J. Endocrinol.,
April 1, 2007;
156(4):
463 - 469.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. A. van Tijn, J. J. M. de Vijlder, B. Verbeeten Jr., P. H. Verkerk, and T. Vulsma
Neonatal Detection of Congenital Hypothyroidism of Central Origin
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
June 1, 2005;
90(6):
3350 - 3359.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Leger, S. Danner, D. Simon, C. Garel, and P. Czernichow
Do All Patients with Childhood-Onset Growth Hormone Deficiency (GHD) and Ectopic Neurohypophysis Have Persistent GHD in Adulthood?
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
February 1, 2005;
90(2):
650 - 656.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. G. F. Osorio, S. Marui, A. A. L. Jorge, A. C. Latronico, L. S. S. Lo, C. C. Leite, V. Estefan, B. B. Mendonca, and I. J. P. Arnhold
Pituitary Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Function in Patients with Growth Hormone Deficiency with and without Mutations in GHRH-R, GH-1, or PROP-1 Genes
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
November 1, 2002;
87(11):
5076 - 5084.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. A. Mitchell, P. Q. Thomas, M. R. Zacharin, and I. E. Scheffer
Ectopic Posterior Pituitary Lobe and Periventricular Heterotopia: Cerebral Malformations with the Same Underlying Mechanism?
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol.,
October 1, 2002;
23(9):
1475 - 1481.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. W. Sloop, E. C. Walvoord, A. D. Showalter, O. H. Pescovitz, and S. J. Rhodes
Molecular Analysis of LHX3 and PROP-1 in Pituitary Hormone Deficiency Patients with Posterior Pituitary Ectopia
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.,
August 1, 2000;
85(8):
2701 - 2708.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
|
 |
|